The evils of socialism.. (soldier, Clinton, military, dollar)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
we do that here without the threat. the sad note is that when asked to help too many americans yell dirty commie. somewhere somehow along the road john wayne became marie antoinette.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Osborne
I might suggest speaking with someone that has lived in a socialist country.
Also, start with Korea and do a night view of the border between north and south.
Tell me what you see.
Now about the old ladies yard.
Not to worry.
Obama will moe it.
We're doing that now with the Welfare System and Social Security. And as far as Obama goes, I'd help him mow thier lawn. I don't want to be a lazy nieghbor.
I've been to Korea and I've seen the way they live. Thier problem has roots that go deeper than our own. They had an Emporer many years ago to dael with, we got rid of the English King that wanted to rule us. They stayed backward, we moved on.
Just wondering where the money comes from for all those great socialist programs.....
Instead of spending our billions of dollars in taxes on an endless war, that money would be re-directed to the citizens of THIS country. You do know that the Iraqis are building a subway system right? I wonder where that money came from?
Instead of spending our billions of dollars in taxes on an endless war, that money would be re-directed to the citizens of THIS country. You do know that the Iraqis are building a subway system right? I wonder where that money came from?
Just like all the money the CIA funneled into the hands of the Afgans so they could fight against Russia during the 10 yr Afgan war. And whose our thorn in that country?
Just wondering where the money comes from for all those great socialist programs.....
Iraq - to the tune of some upteen bajillion dollars a day that we are funneling into that travesty. Perhaps we can spend the $18 per meal that we are paying contractors for the soldiers meals (instead of letting army/navy/air force/marine cooks do their job), and instead feed the HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS of homeless children, mentally ill, and elderly that are living in the streets and eating out of dumpsters.
If Obama is a socialist, he will gladly hand over "the means of production". WE, the people, ie, will own the car companies, and get the profits from them.
Socialism means that the workers own the factory. We will not OWN the big cheese's factories, believe me.
If Obama is a socialist, he will gladly hand over "the means of production". WE, the people, ie, will own the car companies, and get the profits from them.
Socialism means that the workers own the factory. We will not OWN the big cheese's factories, believe me.
Maybe thats not a bad idea . We as tax payer allow the Gov to bail them out and we are allowed to buy up all the stocks in those companies, not the employees thou. Then we fire all the top brass and bring in someone like Ross Parue "not sura how to spell his name" and pay him a set amount to run the business. And, by doing this, the union is shut-out of all the plants forever and thier sub-companies as well, like the steel mills. I Like It!
I think the question that needs to be addressed is, what is a society?
By nature, humans are a communal species, meaning that our common survival has always been dependent upon a reliance on other members of our species. From our earliest beginnings, humans have been dependent upon banding together for the common good. How we go about systematizing our communities is a matter of debate, but the bottom line is that we depend upon one another for our survival as a species.
For some strange reason, this very fundamental concept seems to be lost on far too many "conservative" commentators. Suddenly for the first time in the long history of the human species, the concept of community is suppose to be supplanted by the concept of self. This may work for some individuals on a very micro level, but it is pure fantasy from a macro perspective. We all depend upon each other to survive as a species.
If we used the example above and extrapolated it to the level of the most basic human community, the family, would we be arguing that grandma, who is no longer able to work or provide for herself be given food that she did not earn, or cook? No, we would consider such behavior as abuse of the elderly. No serious person would argue that the family is being socialistic because it takes food from the provider and gives it to grandma. The same held true for most primitive societies when the concept of family became extended to include the tribe. Collective hunting and gathering, shared shelter, common defense are all part of tribal society, which may appear at first blush to be simply an expression of altruism but is in fact part of our inherent communality, an inborn trait that has facilitated human survival for eons.
So, what is inherently evil about the extenuation of these same human traits to a far more complex society that has grown in size and complexity in no small part as a result of doing what humans are genetically coded to do in the first place, to combine as a species to produce for one another and their common well being?
What is a city, a state or a nation, but a hyper sized family, a gigantic and indeed complex tribe. If we can find no fault in providing for the grandma in our home why do we stop there and not provide for the grandma of our tribe regardless to how big our tribe has become? So, the question is, what is the most efficient method for doing so. If we as an individual lose sight of our tribal responsibility for personally caring for our neighbor, should the tribe? I think not. So what is the most efficient way for the tribe - be it city, state or federal - for providing for those who can not? is a government edict requiring some neighbor to cut her lawn the most efficient method of providing care? Is it efficient to have a Department of Individual Tribal Responsibility lawn to assign neighbors to lawn duty, an enforcement arm to see that such regulations are carried out, and a mechanism for punishing those who don't? Or, is it simply more efficient to demand a portion of our wealth be transfered to the larger society and then redistributed another member to go out and cut the lawn?
Frankly it isn't any simpler than that.
It amazes me that people are paid to think of ways to counter what nature has so simply designed.
No, don't be gullible enough to believe Obama is a socialist. Real socialists know without a doubt he's none of them.
Ok, I'm a socialist . I like to socialize with everybody I meet, I admit I'm a very social person. Thank you very much for noticing.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
. We as tax payer allow the Gov to bail them out and we are allowed to buy up all the stocks in those companies, not the employees thou. Then we fire all the top brass and bring in someone like Ross Parue "not sura how to spell his name" and pay him a set amount to run the business. And, by doing this, the union is shut-out of all the plants forever and thier sub-companies as well, like the steel mills. I Like It!
.
