Become a part of one of the fastest growing adult communities online. We have something for you, whether you’re a male member seeking out new friends or a new lady on the scene looking to take advantage of our many opportunities to network, make new friends, or connect with people. Join today & take part in lively discussions, take advantage of all the great features that attract hundreds of new daily members!
"The problem with socialism is that eventually
you run out of other people's money."
- Margaret Thatcher
Maggy Thatcher, hmmm
Decimated England's industy, leading to mass unemployment
Sponsored and was a major supporter of a social housing expansion, called the 'right to buy' program that led to a crisis still being felt today.
Do a little research before you just throw random quotes around that you think make you sound smart.
Decimated England's industy, leading to mass unemployment
Sponsored and was a major supporter of a social housing expansion, called the 'right to buy' program that led to a crisis still being felt today.
Do a little research before you just throw random quotes around that you think make you sound smart.
All that must have happened before she made that statement. She apparently learned her lesson, lol.
A massive explosion in a Chinese warehouse kills dozens (so far) and causes huge devastation.
This is what happens in socialist countries, Womby. Because they skimp on basic safety items in order to maximize economic growth and profits to be redistributed to their supporters.
What was that you were saying about socialism, mope?
You couldn't have picked a worse example.
"Because they skimp on basic safety items in order to maximize economic growth and profits to be redistributed to their supporters.".....TF does that even mean??
In a socialist system "basic safety items" would be given priority, because they affect the society a lot more than a "economic growth and profits". You're thinking capitalism.
If you're talking about a governmental system where the government decides what social system works best for the economy, then you're thinking communism.
A socialist system is actually very compatible with a democratic nation. It's where we, the people, decide where our resources and money go. Not politicians.
To be clear, I'm not talking your average joe deciding how much to spend on military. I'm talking economists in charge of making spending decisions, scientists in charge of making decisions on climate change etc etc. That's how a perfect socialist system goes. No more spending trillions on a war that 90% of us don't agree with.
A massive explosion in a Chinese warehouse kills dozens (so far) and causes huge devastation.
This is what happens in socialist countries, Womby. Because they skimp on basic safety items in order to maximize economic growth and profits to be redistributed to their supporters.
What was that you were saying about socialism, mope?
indeed! let's go to the video shall we?
simple minds understand pictures better
Quote:
Originally Posted by DSK
I have been to China and the air quality totally sucks - fucking commies.They don't have catalytic converters on their cars - the cheap fucks.
so have i. it made my smoker's hack better!
Quote:
Originally Posted by shanm
You couldn't have picked a worse example.
"Because they skimp on basic safety items in order to maximize economic growth and profits to be redistributed to their supporters.".....TF does that even mean??
In a socialist system "basic safety items" would be given priority, because they affect the society a lot more than a "economic growth and profits". You're thinking capitalism.
basic safety. good point. see? china doesn't allow their kids into the cesspool with out proper flotation devices!
If you're talking about a governmental system where the government decides what social system works best for the economy, then you're thinking communism.
A socialist system is actually very compatible with a democratic nation. It's where we, the people, decide where our resources and money go. Not politicians.
To be clear, I'm not talking your average joe deciding how much to spend on military. I'm talking economists in charge of making spending decisions, scientists in charge of making decisions on climate change etc etc. That's how a perfect socialist system goes. No more spending trillions on a war that 90% of us don't agree with.
A socialist system is actually very compatible with a democratic nation.
"Because they skimp on basic safety items in order to maximize economic growth and profits to be redistributed to their supporters.".....TF does that even mean??
In a socialist system "basic safety items" would be given priority, because they affect the society a lot more than a "economic growth and profits". You're thinking capitalism.
If you're talking about a governmental system where the government decides what social system works best for the economy, then you're thinking communism.
A socialist system is actually very compatible with a democratic nation. It's where we, the people, decide where our resources and money go. Not politicians.
To be clear, I'm not talking your average joe deciding how much to spend on military. I'm talking economists in charge of making spending decisions, scientists in charge of making decisions on climate change etc etc. That's how a perfect socialist system goes. No more spending trillions on a war that 90% of us don't agree with.
More progressive fantasy. You keep imagining an ideal system in your mind and argue about THAT, rather than any real world system.
This is PURE nonsense:
-----------------------------------------------
In a socialist system "basic safety items" would be given priority, because they affect the society a lot more than a "economic growth and profits". You're thinking capitalism.
-----------------------------------------------
Do you have ANY evidence to back that up?
In reality, daily experience tells us the exact opposite. The wealthy capitalist nations are far safer than any of the socialist nations (real world ones, not fantasy ones).
Read some newspapers.
Hurricanes and earthquakes in the US, typically cause deaths in the low double digits. When they hit India or South America or pretty much anywhere in Asia or Africa, they kill in the thousands. That is because wealthy nations have the excess wealth necessary to spend on stronger skyscrapers and apartment buildings, resilient bridges, evacuation routes, etc. That excess wealth comes from stressing economic growth and profits.
We got to where we are in terms of safety because of capitalism, not socialism - which obviously has not been tried here.
"A socialist system is actually very compatible with a democratic nation."
Strawman argument. I never said it wasn't. Lots of people have electively hobbled themselves.
And then this inanity:
----------------------------------------
It's where we, the people, decide where our resources and money go. Not politicians.
To be clear, I'm not talking your average joe deciding how much to spend on military. I'm talking economists in charge of making spending decisions, scientists in charge of making decisions on climate change etc etc.
-----------------------------------------
Well, which is it? We the people? Or elite experts? How can you so completely contradict yourself in less than three sentences?
Wake up and smell the coffee. Politicians ALWAYS decide where the money goes. ALWAYS. That's why they are elected in the first place.
Economists give advice and make predictions. But they don't decide how the money gets spent. Politicians do. In fact, economists often cannot agree among themselves. That's why the final decisions are not in their hands.
Ditto the scientists. They give advice and make predictions. But they don't decide how the money gets spent. Politicians do.
And finally
---------------------------------------- That's how a perfect socialist system goes.
-----------------------------------------
Yeah, a system that has never existed. And never will.
More progressive fantasy. You keep imagining an ideal system in your mind and argue about THAT, rather than any real world system.
This is PURE nonsense:
-----------------------------------------------
In a socialist system "basic safety items" would be given priority, because they affect the society a lot more than a "economic growth and profits". You're thinking capitalism.
-----------------------------------------------
Do you have ANY evidence to back that up?
In reality, daily experience tells us the exact opposite. The wealthy capitalist nations are far safer than any of the socialist nations (real world ones, not fantasy ones).
Read some newspapers.
Hmmm any evidence....let's see, why don't I begin with the fact that you have a huge problem distinguishing between socialism and communism. They're not inter-changeable, no matter how much you'd like them to be, dummy. Look them up and get back to me.
Tell me something, if you took a great idea, and implemented it badly, who'd be to blame?
The idea? or you?
Pakistan is a democratic country with a capitalistic system in place. Look how well it's worked out for them.
Germany is a largely socialist ( and also democratic) country. Again, I say, look how well it's worked out for them.
No one system has a monopoly on anything. It's exactly the fact that dumb people believe that that half our problems remain unsolved. You, and many others of your ilk, cringe every time you hear the word socialism, without even understanding what it means.
Let's look at it on a micro level. "Public safety" you say? What's the deal with Obamacare being socialist again?
It's goal is to have everyone covered with health insurance.
Is that not a viable goal for the best country in the world to have?
The answer is only NO in a capitalist system, where the fact that you're paying slightly more so that the less fortunate can escape the underpinnings of an unfair system is considered highway robbery. Your patriotism ends where your pockets begin.
Hmmm any evidence....let's see, why don't I begin with the fact that you have a huge problem distinguishing between socialism and communism. They're not inter-changeable, no matter how much you'd like them to be, dummy. Look them up and get back to me.
Tell me something, if you took a great idea, and implemented it badly, who'd be to blame?
The idea? or you?
Pakistan is a democratic country with a capitalistic system in place. Look how well it's worked out for them.
Germany is a largely socialist ( and also democratic) country. Again, I say, look how well it's worked out for them.
No one system has a monopoly on anything. It's exactly the fact that dumb people believe that that half our problems remain unsolved. You, and many others of your ilk, cringe every time you hear the word socialism, without even understanding what it means.
Let's look at it on a micro level. "Public safety" you say? What's the deal with Obamacare being socialist again?
It's goal is to have everyone covered with health insurance.
Is that not a viable goal for the best country in the world to have?
The answer is only NO in a capitalist system, where the fact that you're paying slightly more so that the less fortunate can escape the underpinnings of an unfair system is considered highway robbery. Your patriotism ends where your pockets begin.
let's play who's the commie or who's the socialist?
Hmmm any evidence....let's see, why don't I begin with the fact that you have a huge problem distinguishing between socialism and communism. They're not inter-changeable, no matter how much you'd like them to be, dummy. Look them up and get back to me.
Tell me something, if you took a great idea, and implemented it badly, who'd be to blame?
The idea? or you?
Pakistan is a democratic country with a capitalistic system in place. Look how well it's worked out for them.
Germany is a largely socialist ( and also democratic) country. Again, I say, look how well it's worked out for them.
No one system has a monopoly on anything. It's exactly the fact that dumb people believe that that half our problems remain unsolved. You, and many others of your ilk, cringe every time you hear the word socialism, without even understanding what it means.
Let's look at it on a micro level. "Public safety" you say? What's the deal with Obamacare being socialist again?
It's goal is to have everyone covered with health insurance. Is that not a viable goal for the best country in the world to have?
The answer is only NO in a capitalist system, where the fact that you're paying slightly more so that the less fortunate can escape the underpinnings of an unfair system is considered highway robbery. Your patriotism ends where your pockets begin.
This is the thing I will never understand. We proclaim ourselves the greatest country in the history of the world, and yet we don't provide healthcare for our citizens. There's something inherently wrong with that. We talk about capitalism giving everyone the ability to chase the american dream, but we don't acknowledge that the underpinnings of that capitalism and of that democracy are not level for all citizens. So we are NOT giving each citizen a fair shake and chance at the american dream. We are lying to ourselves. What good is that? In the end we only hurt the thing we claim to love, our country.
oh you are quick to jump on a pole .. er post aren't you?
at least you can enjoy some Cali blue sky while riding down the 405. fuckhead
Riding down the 405? Mostly sitting still, with intermittent movement. And I still don't see what your point is about us having catalytic converters and they don't. Are you saying they aren't communist ENOUGH?
Republicans have more in common with China then they like to admit, China has shit all over the environment, Republicunts don't want any regulation of pollution. When Americans protested W's war they were glad to see them sprayed in the face with mace ad arrested, same kinda shit Chinas govt loves to do.
