Dinosaur Topics: Socialism and Communism

[Crazyhorse1]

How to prove you're a dinosaur when talking to a liberal democratic: Bring up the words socialism and communism in relation to public policy. Frankly, nothing's further from our minds. As a matter of fact, we associate Republicans and the right with repressive, totalitarian states and want the Republican right out of power precisely because it is looting the public treasury for the benefit of a parasitic class: the rich. That, and our desire to preserve traditional American valuves and freedoms, are matters of current overwhelming emphasis. We do not define ourselves as socialists...or anything close. Anti-fascists? Yes. Socialists? No. Catch up with the times.

[visionary]

How to prove you're a dinosaur when talking to a liberal democratic: Bring up the words socialism and communism in relation to public policy. Frankly, nothing's further from our minds. As a matter of fact, we associate Republicans and the right with repressive, totalitarian states and want the Republican right out of power precisely because it is looting the public treasury for the benefit of a parasitic class: the rich. That, and our desire to preserve traditional American valuves and freedoms, are matters of current overwhelming emphasis. We do not define ourselves as socialists...or anything close. Anti-fascists? Yes. Socialists? No. Catch up with the times.

Oh no, this is too funny.

:laugh:

[Zguy28]

That, and our desire to preserve traditional American valuves and freedoms, are matters of current overwhelming emphasis. We do not define ourselves as socialists...or anything close. Anti-fascists? Yes. Socialists? No. Catch up with the times.

Traditional American values? You mean like these:

Star Spangled Banner - last verse

Oh! Thus be it ever, when freemen shall stand

Between their loved home and the war's desolation!

Blest with victory and peace, may the heav'n rescued land

Praise the Power that hath made and preserved us a nation.

Then conquer we must, when our cause it is just,

And this be our motto: "In God is our trust."

And the star-spangled banner in triumph shall wave

O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave!]

Samuel Adams - political essay 1749

[N]either the wisest constitution nor the wisest laws will secure the liberty and happiness of a people whose manners are universally corrupt.

Thomas Jefferson - Second Inaugural Address, March 4, 1805

Almighty God, Who has given us this good land for our heritage; We humbly beseech Thee that we may always prove ourselves a people mindful of Thy favor and glad to do Thy will. Bless our land with honorable ministry, sound learning, and pure manners. Save us from violence, discord, and confusion, from pride arrogance, and from every evil way. Defend our liberties, and fashion into one united people the multitude brought ither out of many kindreds and tongues.

Endow with Thy spirit of wisdom those to whom in Thy Name we entrust the authority of government, that there may be justice and peace at home, and that through obedience to Thy law, we may show forth Thy praise among the nations of the earth.

In time of prosperity fill our hearts with thankfulness, and in the day of trouble suffer not our turst in Thee to fail; all of which we ask through Jesus Christ our Lord, Amen

Jedediah Morse - Election Sermon given at Charleston MA, April 25, 1799

To the kindly influence of Christianity we owe that degree of civil freedom, and political and social happiness which mankind now enjoys. . . . Whenever the pillars of Christianity shall be overthrown, our present republican forms of government, and all blessings which flow from them, must fall with them.

Just to name a few...

Are these the Traditional values you represent?

[Mass_SkinsFan]

How to prove you're a dinosaur when talking to a liberal democratic: Bring up the words socialism and communism in relation to public policy. Frankly, nothing's further from our minds. As a matter of fact, we associate Republicans and the right with repressive, totalitarian states and want the Republican right out of power precisely because it is looting the public treasury for the benefit of a parasitic class: the rich. That, and our desire to preserve traditional American valuves and freedoms, are matters of current overwhelming emphasis. We do not define ourselves as socialists...or anything close. Anti-fascists? Yes. Socialists? No. Catch up with the times.

First off, I believe that should be "liberal democrat" not "liberal democratic". Or is that the ebonics form of the word/phrase?

Of course nothing is further from your mind. You folks don't use your minds.... It's all heart, emotion and feelings with you folks. If you used your minds you would understand how out of touch with reality your policies are.

The RICH are a parasitic class? How much welfare, food stamps, and medicare is Donald Trump taking from the local, state and federal government? Compare that to the amount he's putting INTO those same levels of government in taxes and fees. Now who's the parasite?

Gee, I didn't realize that gun control, social welfare, pacifism, and employment quotas were traditional American values. I learn something new every day. (LOL)

Adolph Hitler defined himself as the democraticly elected leader of Germany too. That doesn't mean he actually was. How YOU define yourself is irrelevant. It's how REALITY defines you that is relevant.

[Darth Tater]

The desire to distribute reources at the point of a gun is at the heart of leftism. This is also the central position of socialists.

[gchwood]

How to prove you're a dinosaur when talking to a liberal democratic: Bring up the words socialism and communism in relation to public policy. Frankly, nothing's further from our minds. As a matter of fact, we associate Republicans and the right with repressive, totalitarian states and want the Republican right out of power precisely because it is looting the public treasury for the benefit of a parasitic class: the rich. That, and our desire to preserve traditional American valuves and freedoms, are matters of current overwhelming emphasis. We do not define ourselves as socialists...or anything close. Anti-fascists? Yes. Socialists? No. Catch up with the times.

If liberal democrats are there to preserve american values and traditions, why do they want gun control? This country exists because our citizens had the right to arms.

How can the rich be considered parasitic when they pay the majority of the taxes? For every 1,000,000 income of the rich at 12% they pay $120,000. You would need 14.5 people making 25,000 and paying 33%taxes to equal that $1,000,000 in income. Now consider Bill Gates who averages $465,000,000 per week. Multiply that by 52 and that equals $24,180,000,000. At 12% he would have paid $2,901,600,000. For the same people making $25,000 and paying in at 33% it would take 351,709 people to match what he would have paid!!!!!

Whether he paid it or not is for the IRS to deal with.

[PleaseBlitz]

How to prove you're a dinosaur when talking to a liberal democratic: Bring up the words socialism and communism in relation to public policy. Frankly, nothing's further from our minds. As a matter of fact, we associate Republicans and the right with repressive, totalitarian states and want the Republican right out of power precisely because it is looting the public treasury for the benefit of a parasitic class: the rich. That, and our desire to preserve traditional American valuves and freedoms, are matters of current overwhelming emphasis. We do not define ourselves as socialists...or anything close. Anti-fascists? Yes. Socialists? No. Catch up with the times.

Sounds to me like someone (Nelms?) called Crazy a pinko commie and it struck a nerve. :laugh:

[Zguy28]

Sounds to me like someone (Nelms?) called Crazy a pinko commie and it struck a nerve. :laugh:

The correct lingo is "Pinko Commie Yellow Running Dog"

JUST KIDDING!

[Baculus]

There is something that, as both the Left and the Right, we should realize in this nation: We have grown up with many elements of socialism in our nation, and many of us do not even realize it. Have you attended public school? You've been in a socialist system and an element of the Communist Manifesto. Recited the Pledge of Allegiance? This was written by a Christian socialist in the late 19th century. Social Security? Yes, a socialistic initiative as well.

What about the early development of this nation, where small communities developed rural socialism, with no regards to modern "political" socialism? This was one of the building blocks of this nation, and a community social spirit is seen as one of the hallmarks of Americana. We can all appreciate rugged individualism, but we also appreciate community and sharing among the community. That is basic socialism, minus the 19th and 20th century politics.

This nation is also rife with examples of Central Planning, another hallmark of socialism. I know of many so-called conservatives who are firm believers in central planning, though they may not realize that this is a socialist tenet as well.

And one last example of socialism in this nation: Government subsidies to corporations. This is an example of wealth being redistributed from the poor to the wealthy and is quite simply a handout from the federal government to the business world. And I would have to guess that many who work in this government-funded businesses would claim to be "anti-socialist." Hogwash.

The desire to distribute reources at the point of a gun is at the heart of leftism. This is also the central position of socialists.

Wealth redistribution is also practiced by the Right: Everything from taxation that favor upper income brackets to the aforementioned corporate welfare are examples of upward wealth redistribution. And why do you think the gap between the poor and the rich have been increasing? The Left have one way to redistribute the wealth, and so does the Right. The Right, just make a bigger noise of pointing at the Left with their accusations of wealth redistribution. With one side, the desire is to spread the wealth among many - with the other, the desire is to concentrate the money among the few.

So, the question has to be asked, knowing that we have grown up in a socialist influenced America - is this good or bad? Has the public school system been a failure, and is the alternative a private education system? What about the Pledge of Allegiance - scrap it for a more "non-socialism" version? Is this ideology terrible enough that we must root out every nook and cranny influence upon our society?

Keep in mind, I have always discussed Libertarianism and its positive influential ideas in this nation, with its roots in classical Liberalism. I am just having an internal debate of what elements of socialism, if any, can be useful, or if the whole system needs to be scrapped.

[nelms]

How to prove you're a dinosaur when talking to a liberal democratic: Bring up the words socialism and communism in relation to public policy. Frankly, nothing's further from our minds. As a matter of fact, we associate Republicans and the right with repressive, totalitarian states and want the Republican right out of power precisely because it is looting the public treasury for the benefit of a parasitic class: the rich. That, and our desire to preserve traditional American valuves and freedoms, are matters of current overwhelming emphasis. We do not define ourselves as socialists...or anything close. Anti-fascists? Yes. Socialists? No. Catch up with the times.

I see you're off your meds again. Was this thread really necessary? :doh:

[Baculus]

How can the rich be considered parasitic when they pay the majority of the taxes? For every 1,000,000 income of the rich at 12% they pay $120,000. You would need 14.5 people making 25,000 and paying 33%taxes to equal that $1,000,000 in income. Now consider Bill Gates who averages $465,000,000 per week. Multiply that by 52 and that equals $24,180,000,000. At 12% he would have paid $2,901,600,000. For the same people making $25,000 and paying in at 33% it would take 351,709 people to match what he would have paid!!!!!

Keep in mind that the upper income brackets receive a larger tax break as well as having many means to reduce their taxable amounts. And, as a note, many Americans will be paying many thousands of dollars more than they receive for their Bush tax break since they aren't receiving the same amount as the upper-income bracket. For example, a person may receive all together, over the years, a few thousand dollars from Earned Income Credits, but they will end up paying $10,000 for the Bush tax break. So, in short, most citizens are actually LOSING MONEY over the long-term with this tax break. Keep in mind, too, that lower income folks pay more in payroll taxes that are never included in these calculations.

I am for tax breaks, but not if I will have to pay thousands of dollars more than I receive just so a person making $250,000+ can receive their large tax break.

[nelms]

Keep in mind that the upper income brackets receive a larger tax break as well as having many means to reduce their taxable amounts. And, as a note, many Americans will be paying many thousands of dollars more than they receive for their Bush tax break since they aren't receiving the same amount as the upper-income bracket. For example, a person may receive all together, over the years, a few thousand dollars from Earned Income Credits, but they will end up paying $10,000 for the Bush tax break. So, in short, most citizens are actually LOSING MONEY over the long-term with this tax break. Keep in mind, too, that lower income folks pay more in payroll taxes that are never included in these calculations.

I am for tax breaks, but not if I will have to pay thousands of dollars more than I receive just so a person making $250,000+ can receive their large tax break.

Here's a novel idea. Why don't you put in the hard work required to become one of the "rich and fortunate" ones? All I ever hear from the left is ****ing and moaning.

[Baculus]

Here's a novel idea. Why don't you put in the hard work required to become one of the "rich and fortunate" ones? All I ever hear from the left is ****ing and moaning.

First of all, everyone that does not agree with you is not the "Left." This seems to be the tactic that the supposed Right prefer to use: "If you do not agree with me, you are a Leftist!" In fact, I may be more Right-wing then you in some ways. Second, apparently engaging in discourse is now "****ing and moaning." Me thinks you would be better served to actually observe what others are saying instead of having a knee-jerk reaction: It really helps with communication.

This isn't about just the idea of tax breaks - I am all for tax breaks. In fact, a well-planned tax break is great. I love getting money back from the government; hurray for a larger return. But, what I DON'T like are tax breaks that COST me money; it will cost me more to pay for than the amount that I will receive for the tax break.

Read further here: http://www.ctj.org/

[Baculus]

BTW, an amusing note: Whenever I bring up the fact that Bush supports socialist programs, his supporters always become strangely quiet. Interesting, eh? :-)

[Kilmer17]

I wont.

I hate that Bush supports socialist programs. And I've been very vocal in that displeasure.

The Prescription Drug Plan for Seniors tops my list of hatred. But it's not the only item.

[Mass_SkinsFan]

There is something that, as both the Left and the Right, we should realize in this nation: We have grown up with many elements of socialism in our nation, and many of us do not even realize it. Have you attended public school? You've been in a socialist system and an element of the Communist Manifesto. Recited the Pledge of Allegiance? This was written by a Christian socialist in the late 19th century. Social Security? Yes, a socialistic initiative as well.

Yes we have grown up with many elements of Socialism in our country. It's one of the reasons that the country is slowly declining. Public schools and social security should definitely be done away with in my mind. The pledge should probably be rewritten a bit (including the addition of those two words) and been made MANDATORY for all American citizens to know, accept and live.

What about the early development of this nation, where small communities developed rural socialism, with no regards to modern "political" socialism? This was one of the building blocks of this nation, and a community social spirit is seen as one of the hallmarks of Americana. We can all appreciate rugged individualism, but we also appreciate community and sharing among the community. That is basic socialism, minus the 19th and 20th century politics.

No, some of us do not appreciate community. I'm more than happy being exceptionally private. Hell, I couldn't tell you the names of more than one or two of the other families in my neighborhood and I'm sure they couldn't tell you mine either. We're the only house with lights OUT on Halloween.

This nation is also rife with examples of Central Planning, another hallmark of socialism. I know of many so-called conservatives who are firm believers in central planning, though they may not realize that this is a socialist tenet as well.

I'm also against Central Planning. Especially on anything more than the lowest, most local levels of government.

And one last example of socialism in this nation: Government subsidies to corporations. This is an example of wealth being redistributed from the poor to the wealthy and is quite simply a handout from the federal government to the business world. And I would have to guess that many who work in this government-funded businesses would claim to be "anti-socialist." Hogwash.

The US Government should not be involved in subsidizing or penalizing private business. Those are not powers granted to the federal government by the Constitution.

So, the question has to be asked, knowing that we have grown up in a socialist influenced America - is this good or bad? Has the public school system been a failure, and is the alternative a private education system? What about the Pledge of Allegiance - scrap it for a more "non-socialism" version? Is this ideology terrible enough that we must root out every nook and cranny influence upon our society?

I believe the current Socialist influenced society in America is a BAD thing. A very BAD thing. It's largely become the accepted norm rather than something to be fought against tooth and nail. The public school system is an utter disaster and has been for years. We need to root out the socialist parts of society and crush then quickly, brutally and permanently.

[Zguy28]

Socialism in itself is not a bad idea. I'm a Christian Conservative and I know that the early church practiced socialism as can be seen in the Bible: Acts chapter 5. The problem in my opinion is that once it grows to a certain scale, it cannot maintain its integrity. We saw this in the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia with Stalin and Lenin.

[The 12th Commandment]

BTW, an amusing note: Whenever I bring up the fact that Bush supports socialist programs, his supporters always become strangely quiet. Interesting, eh? :-)

:applause:

Ever hear of welfare ranching? Dairy Subsidies? I would bet that most recepients are indeed hard core gopers. The one's I know are. I understand and support the need to subsidize certain key ag products, ie wheat, corn, etc. But Milk? The dairymen just have a good strong lobby (with lots o'cash). As for beef, I wouldn't mind paying a little more per pound to allow the millions of overgrazed moonscape acres to recover.

Other parts of the country are suitable for grazing, but for christ sake, here it takes 80 acres to feed one cow for one year and almost all the public land in my county, which is around 1.7 million acres, is used for grazing. That is just rediculous.

Maybe a little off base to you easterners but control, use and disposal of public land in the west is a huge issue right now. We are striving to use the proceeds of selling just a small piece of this surplus public land to fund conservation easements on of all things, FARM LAND, and the idiotic right wing Farm Bureau is fighting it!?!?!?!?!?!?!? WTF!

Edit: I got to thinking. You guys own as much of this land as we do. How do easterners figure we should use all the federal land out west?

[Predicto]

Limited elements of socialism serve an important function in an otherwise capitalist society. An economic safety net keeps the poor from constantly rising up and just burning down the whole place, including the homes of the rich. A public education system provides a much more useful work force for business needs. And so forth.

The hard part is striking the right balance, where the government's presence is not an excessive burden on free enterprise. That is where the differences tend to lie.

[Mass_SkinsFan]

Limited elements of socialism serve an important function in an otherwise capitalist society. An economic safety net keeps the poor from constantly rising up and just burning down the whole place, including the homes of the rich. A public education system provides a much more useful work force for business needs. And so forth.

As you well know, we're not going to agree on this.

The "economic safety net" should be reminding people that if they don't put every ounce of their energy into being successful they don't deserve to be successful and they're not going to get bailed out by those of us who DO bust our butts.

Public education brainwashes out children into accepting the "norms" of society, whether they're proper or not. The Public education system in this country is the equivelant of the "re-education" camps of socialist history and legend so far as I am concerned.

The hard part is striking the right balance, where the government's presence is not an excessive burden on free enterprise. That is where the differences tend to lie.

There is no "right balance" and it turns into a slippery slope to doom. Once the door to socialism is opened it becomes evceptionally difficult to close again.

[gchwood]

Keep in mind that the upper income brackets receive a larger tax break as well as having many means to reduce their taxable amounts. And, as a note, many Americans will be paying many thousands of dollars more than they receive for their Bush tax break since they aren't receiving the same amount as the upper-income bracket. For example, a person may receive all together, over the years, a few thousand dollars from Earned Income Credits, but they will end up paying $10,000 for the Bush tax break. So, in short, most citizens are actually LOSING MONEY over the long-term with this tax break. Keep in mind, too, that lower income folks pay more in payroll taxes that are never included in these calculations.

I am for tax breaks, but not if I will have to pay thousands of dollars more than I receive just so a person making $250,000+ can receive their large tax break.

How do you figure? I for one filed with Earned Income Credits, I paid in a whole $250 last year and received $3000 back, I fail to see how I have paid in more since the tax break, I had paid more because of increased pay but not because of the tax break.

Plus you have missed the point, even though the upper class pays less in tax percentage they pay more in actual dollars. Face it The upper class and the corportations are who pay for these social programs, not the lower and middle classes. They take advantage of the programs. Therefore the wealth redistribution is truely in a downward motion, from upper to lower via social programs (welfare, medicare, medicaid, social security, etc)

[The 12th Commandment]

The "economic safety net" should be reminding people that if they don't put every ounce of their energy into being successful they don't deserve to be successful and they're not going to get bailed out by those of us who DO bust our butts.

I see it as more of an economic safety net for those who do acheive success. It's more expensive to put these people in jail and house them (which is what your proposal would lead too) than it is provide some help up front to try and have them acheive some success too. It's not that I want to necessarily help out of altruism, it's just smarter economically.

[Predicto]

As you well know, we're not going to agree on this.

I am sure of that.

[Mass_SkinsFan]

I see it as more of an economic safety net for those who do acheive success. It's more expensive to put these people in jail and house them (which is what your proposal would lead too) than it is provide some help up front to try and have them acheive some success too. It's not that I want to necessarily help out of altruism, it's just smarter economically.

Actually jail isn't what I had in mind for them; but I've been informed by the staff that I am not allowed to discuss my preferential response to that sort of situation. I'll just say it's considerably less expensive and more permanent than a jail sentence.

[gchwood]

:applause:

Ever hear of welfare ranching? Dairy Subsidies? I would bet that most recepients are indeed hard core gopers. The one's I know are. I understand and support the need to subsidize certain key ag products, ie wheat, corn, etc. But Milk? The dairymen just have a good strong lobby (with lots o'cash). As for beef, I wouldn't mind paying a little more per pound to allow the millions of overgrazed moonscape acres to recover.

Other parts of the country are suitable for grazing, but for christ sake, here it takes 80 acres to feed one cow for one year and almost all the public land in my county, which is around 1.7 million acres, is used for grazing. That is just rediculous.

Maybe a little off base to you easterners but control, use and disposal of public land in the west is a huge issue right now. We are striving to use the proceeds of selling just a small piece of this surplus public land to fund conservation easements on of all things, FARM LAND, and the idiotic right wing Farm Bureau is fighting it!?!?!?!?!?!?!? WTF!

Edit: I got to thinking. You guys own as much of this land as we do. How do easterners figure we should use all the federal land out west?

Are you aware that the government has not allowed the selling price of Corn to raise since the 1950's? How about the fact that we have so much Wheat that the government is begging farmers not to grow it?

Any person is going to take free money, especially if he doesn't even plan to grow wheat or barley.

I know several farmers that are about to lose thier farms because they can not support the farm on the 1950's selling price of corn in a 2006 world. The government is not necessarily helping these farmers out all the time, in fact they are mostly impeeding them