We are +$17,000,000,000,000 in debt, our latest Congress (the 113th) was just named the least productive in history, we have a 5% approval rate in Congress and a 95% incumbency rate, but at least we can pay more than $30,000,000 to let monkeys retire in peace in Louisiana. What is wrong with America....
Oops put this in the wrong place, could someone move this to Discussion. Please and thank you!
Goes to show how much I know about .politics.. I didn't understand most of what you said haha. I try to just shut most of the government's happenings out. It's all going to .poo. anyway, why get depressed by keeping tabs on it? Although, that many zeroes followed by the word "debt" is never good haha
Australia's not much better. Our Prime Minister is a monkey-eared twat who wears budgie smugglers, is a sleaze and is destroying our education and environmental systems. He's getting us outta debt, but only by cutting costs to EVERYTHING.
Bloody Liberals.
I hear Canada is nice.
Canada's ALWAYS nice.
But Canadians, not so much. Snowbirds are terrible.
Rasser is cool.
I hear Austria is a nice place...
At least our government is not Italy's
Berlusconi has still wormed his way around child molestation accusations
Quote from: Ertai on December 05, 2013, 01:35:11 AM
But Canadians, not so much. Snowbirds are terrible.
Rasser is cool.
Hockey, eh? Mattao is cool too.
I like how Canada is basically a mild-mannered America. Except cold as balls.
Quote from: Noblellama on December 04, 2013, 11:57:01 PM
"We're all living in America, America, it's wunderbar!"
Coca-cola! Wonderbra!
Quote from: Gorzo on December 05, 2013, 03:48:57 AM
Quote from: Noblellama on December 04, 2013, 11:57:01 PM
"We're all living in America, America, it's wunderbar!"
Coca-cola! Wonderbra!
And McDonald's and credit cards and... No, wonderbra is enough.
America... Land of the greed and home of the corrupt.
Quote from: PapaBudz on December 05, 2013, 04:25:47 AM
America... Land of the greed and home of the corrupt.
This is also true for Earth.
America never really had any problems until we opened our borders in the early 1900s and started messing with other countries affairs. I think a major problem is that immigrants coming here still identify with their country of origin. I see all these people driving around with non-American flags in their windshields, and it disgusts me. If you're going to live here, then at least be American in public. If you're going to flout your national origin in public, then move back there. There is no national pride or national unity to being from the USA, that's the biggest problem, in my opinion.
Quote from: Taysby on December 04, 2013, 11:53:45 PM
That's the main problem with Obama. He spends way too much money on all the wrong things.
The 1.3 trillion dollar deficit (deficit, not debt, as in how much we go into debt EACH year) that occurred during the BUSH administration has actually been almost halved by the Obama Administration. This isn't Obama's fault, this is the Congress's fault and George W. Bush's fault.
Quote from: rarehuntertay on December 05, 2013, 06:56:05 AM
America never really had any problems until we opened our borders in the early 1900s and started messing with other countries affairs. I think a major problem is that immigrants coming here still identify with their country of origin. I see all these people driving around with non-American flags in their windshields, and it disgusts me. If you're going to live here, then at least be American in public. If you're going to flout your national origin in public, then move back there. There is no national pride or national unity to being from the USA, that's the biggest problem, in my opinion.
A comic my US History teacher once showed us...
(http://www.leftycartoons.com/wp-content/uploads/immigration_history_color.jpg)
Quote from: rarehuntertay on December 05, 2013, 06:56:05 AM
America never really had any problems until we opened our borders in the early 1900s and started messing with other countries affairs. I think a major problem is that immigrants coming here still identify with their country of origin. I see all these people driving around with non-American flags in their windshields, and it disgusts me. If you're going to live here, then at least be American in public. If you're going to flout your national origin in public, then move back there. There is no national pride or national unity to being from the USA, that's the biggest problem, in my opinion.
I disagree. USA started having problems when their government started forcing people into trade agreements which people didn't want to make. Another words, when you started implementing Socialism. Income tax + FED was the start of your demise. You let your bureaucracy grow beyond any reason, probably past the point of no return.
Let's hope your next civil war will be civilised.
Immigrants created your country, let me remind you, or perhaps teach you. USA borders were open from the beginning of the country. Closing them was a bad idea, you should open them again. Remove all Socialism first, or you will get influx of needy people. You want greedy and hard working, not greedy and needy. Everyone is greedy and needy, all of us.
Capitalism is doomed to fail. Socialism, in theory, works great, however, no one likes it. When Andrew Johnson or Andrew Jackson was president (can't remember which one), actually had the national debt paid off. But the country went immediately back into debt just to run. I don't disagree about immigrants making this country or even being here. I disagree about them saying that they are Brazilian or Greek or Filipino. If you are an American citizen, that is what you are: American.
Interesting discussion about this 10 years when I was going through field medical school. My Staff Sergeant, Brazilian descent, born in Brazil, American citizen, went around to every person in the class asking them what the were. One girl answered Mexican. His reply, "are you an American citizen?" her reply, yes. Next question, "were you born in Mexico?" her answer , no. His last reply, "therefore you aren't Mexican, you're American." he did this for everyone. When we asked him the same, he replied I was born in brazil, I became an American citizen. I am no longer Brazilian, I am American.
This is what I'm getting at. Immigrants, who become citizens, still claiming there national origin. If I ever emigrated from the US to another country, such as France or Romania, then I would claim myself as that country, not US.
/end rant
Am I the only one who doesn't care where a person or their family is from?
America is a melting pot of cultures. Who cares where you came from, what country if origin you identify with, or any of that? None of it matters...
We're all immigrants here except for the native Americans anyway.
That's how I feel, anyway.
One thing that definitely needs fixed is the electoral procedure for President. The general population doesn't actually vote for the President.
Quote from: rarehuntertay on December 05, 2013, 12:36:24 PM
One thing that definitely needs fixed is the electoral procedure for President. The general population doesn't actually vote for the President.
I second that!
Quote from: rarehuntertay on December 05, 2013, 12:36:24 PM
One thing that definitely needs fixed is the electoral procedure for President. The general population doesn't actually vote for the President.
I am most likely wrong, but isn't the general populous's vote just an opinion and a state has people that actually vote for the president?
On another note, I've thought about this for awhile.. But doesn't credit card interest pretty make non-exaistant money? Like you owe $100 to a credit company and they charge you say 10% interest. You owe them another $10 that was never there before. I am just curious on this point because I'm not a very political and economic person so I'm not really sure how it all works. I pay for everything I can in cash to avoid stupidity with credit companies and such (then again I don't have much money :p)
Quote from: Deebiia on December 05, 2013, 01:38:30 PM
Quote from: rarehuntertay on December 05, 2013, 12:36:24 PM
One thing that definitely needs fixed is the electoral procedure for President. The general population doesn't actually vote for the President.
I am most likely wrong, but isn't the general populous's vote just an opinion and a state has people that actually vote for the president?
On another note, I've thought about this for awhile.. But doesn't credit card interest pretty make non-exaistant money? Like you owe $100 to a credit company and they charge you say 10% interest. You owe them another $10 that was never there before. I am just curious on this point because I'm not a very political and economic person so I'm not really sure how it all works. I pay for everything I can in cash to avoid stupidity with credit companies and such (then again I don't have much money :p)
The states have what are known as electors. They are aligned to a political party, but they do not necessarily have to vote for their party's candidate.
As for your interest, the credit card company is giving you the use of their money, but at a cost. That is what interest is. And sometimes the rate is outrageous...
Watch a cartoon :) 15 min each :)
If you didn't already know the information presented, it just might rock your world.
Part 1
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=-bXuum3OdWA
Part 2
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=_zWMVMGYg-g
Quote from: Gorzo on December 05, 2013, 03:48:57 AM
Quote from: Noblellama on December 04, 2013, 11:57:01 PM
"We're all living in America, America, it's wunderbar!"
Coca-cola! Wonderbra!
Haha Ranmstein. It's been a while :P
Haha anytime! 👍😄
Quote from: ConanEdo on December 05, 2013, 03:49:59 PM
Quote from: Arzair on December 05, 2013, 03:08:56 PM
Watch a cartoon :) 15 min each :)
If you didn't already know the information presented, it just might rock your world.
Part 1
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=-bXuum3OdWA
Part 2
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=_zWMVMGYg-g
Anti-Semitic conspiracy theories are not helpful. O'Keefe is a nut job, and those videos are for the guillible.
Anti-Semitic? Classic deflection, a cop-out to actually discussing the facts.
Gullible? Factually, everything that was presented is true. The federal reserve is privately owned... The banking situation is accurate...Granted the direction he takes it with a giant squid monster is a little silly, but the processes discussed/explained are accurate.
The system is rigged and to not believe it suggests naïveté.
(To believe in anything 100% without first doing your own research is also naive, so these cartoons presented a silly way to possibly spread actual information or get a real conversation started was the intent)
Quote from: rarehuntertay on December 05, 2013, 08:52:08 AM
Capitalism is doomed to fail. Socialism, in theory, works great, however, no one likes it.
No, it has been proven by theorists that Socialism doesn't work, that it cannot successfully be implemented in practice. It has been confirmed by 150 of failed implementations of Socialism that it cannot work in practice, for the very reason why it doesn't work in theory: everyone is greedy and needy. So if people are given opportunity to claim that they need something for free, they will, and the system will run out of resources and collapse.
Quote from: Noblellama on December 05, 2013, 06:12:21 PM
So communism with less regulation and more opportunity?
Communism is the far left wing of Socialism, per classic definitions of economic systems, so it would by definition be more regulated. No private ownership at all. Communism is great within immediate family. Beyond that, you will always have problems related to property. Whose apple is that, and it only gets worse from there ;)
For me, the ideal economic system is freedom, free market, the classic definition of Capitalism. Please note that corporate sponsored regulations belong to Socialism, not Capitalism.
Quote from: Noblellama on December 05, 2013, 06:29:04 PM
So more capitalism as described by Carnegie, Rockefeller and Adam Smith rather than what it has evolved or devolved into?
More freedom.
I would look into the works of Austrian School of Economy, people like Von Mises and Hayek, if you are interested in theory.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Austrian_School
Quote from: Piotr on December 06, 2013, 05:28:25 AM
Quote from: Noblellama on December 05, 2013, 06:29:04 PM
So more capitalism as described by Carnegie, Rockefeller and Adam Smith rather than what it has evolved or devolved into?
More freedom.
I would look into the works of Austrian School of Economy, people like Von Mises and Hayek, if you are interested in theory.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Austrian_School
So laissez faire economics? We have seen many times that when we have laissez faire, businesses will run rampant. Just look at the oppressive monopolies of Rockefeller and Carnegie. Every economic system must have some sort of government oversight to prevent bubbles, monopolies, insider trading, product quality control, ect.
Quote from: Agrus Kos, Enforcer of Truth on December 06, 2013, 07:09:58 AM
Quote from: Piotr on December 06, 2013, 05:28:25 AM
Quote from: Noblellama on December 05, 2013, 06:29:04 PM
So more capitalism as described by Carnegie, Rockefeller and Adam Smith rather than what it has evolved or devolved into?
More freedom.
I would look into the works of Austrian School of Economy, people like Von Mises and Hayek, if you are interested in theory.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Austrian_School
So laissez faire economics? We have seen many times that when we have laissez faire, businesses will run rampant. Just look at the oppressive monopolies of Rockefeller and Carnegie. Every economic system must have some sort of government oversight to prevent bubbles, monopolies, insider trading, product quality control, ect.
Long running monopoly is not possible in free market because competition always destroys it.
Monopolies in the long run are only possible when you regulate the market.
Quote from: Vileo on December 05, 2013, 03:18:38 AM
Quote from: Ertai on December 05, 2013, 01:35:11 AM
But Canadians, not so much. Snowbirds are terrible.
Rasser is cool.
Hockey, eh? Mattao is cool too.
I like how Canada is basically a mild-mannered America. Except cold as balls.
Lol thanks bud! :P
It's 'Murica! Let's get the spelling right. I am by no means an economist. I do beieve that this country has made it more profitable for certain people not to contribute. I don't blame anyone one leader. I blame a current mentality. It seems as though people have been brainwashed into the "graduate college and you'll make 6 figures" mindset. I have only one comment. Call the plumber that didn't go 90 grand in debt for college to come to your house to fix your sink on the weekend, or the look at the hourly charge to fix your car when it breaks down. I'll work on an engine or snake a pipe to get the money those buisness owners get paid.
PS reading further into this thread about the Rockefellers and names of the ultra wealthy, a poor man has never been able to offer me a job.
Quote from: Piotr on December 06, 2013, 04:21:49 PM
Quote from: Agrus Kos, Enforcer of Truth on December 06, 2013, 07:09:58 AM
Quote from: Piotr on December 06, 2013, 05:28:25 AM
Quote from: Noblellama on December 05, 2013, 06:29:04 PM
So more capitalism as described by Carnegie, Rockefeller and Adam Smith rather than what it has evolved or devolved into?
More freedom.
I would look into the works of Austrian School of Economy, people like Von Mises and Hayek, if you are interested in theory.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Austrian_School
So laissez faire economics? We have seen many times that when we have laissez faire, businesses will run rampant. Just look at the oppressive monopolies of Rockefeller and Carnegie. Every economic system must have some sort of government oversight to prevent bubbles, monopolies, insider trading, product quality control, ect.
Long running monopoly is not possible in free market because competition always destroys it.
Monopolies in the long run are only possible when you regulate the market.
No, because Carnegie and Rockefeller were smart. They would move into a town and sell all of their goods and services at like 80% of their competitors prices just to drive them out of business and then raise the price to like 110% of what their competitor charged. If another business stepped forward, they'd just lower the price again to drive them out of business.
Quote from: Agrus Kos, Enforcer of Truth on December 06, 2013, 11:31:14 PM
Quote from: Piotr on December 06, 2013, 04:21:49 PM
Quote from: Agrus Kos, Enforcer of Truth on December 06, 2013, 07:09:58 AM
Quote from: Piotr on December 06, 2013, 05:28:25 AM
Quote from: Noblellama on December 05, 2013, 06:29:04 PM
So more capitalism as described by Carnegie, Rockefeller and Adam Smith rather than what it has evolved or devolved into?
More freedom.
I would look into the works of Austrian School of Economy, people like Von Mises and Hayek, if you are interested in theory.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Austrian_School
So laissez faire economics? We have seen many times that when we have laissez faire, businesses will run rampant. Just look at the oppressive monopolies of Rockefeller and Carnegie. Every economic system must have some sort of government oversight to prevent bubbles, monopolies, insider trading, product quality control, ect.
Long running monopoly is not possible in free market because competition always destroys it.
Monopolies in the long run are only possible when you regulate the market.
No, because Carnegie and Rockefeller were smart. They would move into a town and sell all of their goods and services at like 80% of their competitors prices just to drive them out of business and then raise the price to like 110% of what their competitor charged. If another business stepped forward, they'd just lower the price again to drive them out of business.
You call selling below cost smart? Lol.
Quote from: Mattao19 on December 06, 2013, 04:55:26 PM
Quote from: Vileo on December 05, 2013, 03:18:38 AM
Quote from: Ertai on December 05, 2013, 01:35:11 AM
But Canadians, not so much. Snowbirds are terrible.
Rasser is cool.
Hockey, eh? Mattao is cool too.
I like how Canada is basically a mild-mannered America. Except cold as balls.
Lol thanks bud! :P
Youre welcome lol.
Quote from: ConanEdo on December 07, 2013, 06:48:23 AM
Quote from: Piotr on December 07, 2013, 04:24:29 AM
Quote from: Agrus Kos, Enforcer of Truth on December 06, 2013, 11:31:14 PM
Quote from: Piotr on December 06, 2013, 04:21:49 PM
Quote from: Agrus Kos, Enforcer of Truth on December 06, 2013, 07:09:58 AM
Quote from: Piotr on December 06, 2013, 05:28:25 AM
Quote from: Noblellama on December 05, 2013, 06:29:04 PM
So more capitalism as described by Carnegie, Rockefeller and Adam Smith rather than what it has evolved or devolved into?
More freedom.
I would look into the works of Austrian School of Economy, people like Von Mises and Hayek, if you are interested in theory.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Austrian_School
So laissez faire economics? We have seen many times that when we have laissez faire, businesses will run rampant. Just look at the oppressive monopolies of Rockefeller and Carnegie. Every economic system must have some sort of government oversight to prevent bubbles, monopolies, insider trading, product quality control, ect.
Long running monopoly is not possible in free market because competition always destroys it.
Monopolies in the long run are only possible when you regulate the market.
No, because Carnegie and Rockefeller were smart. They would move into a town and sell all of their goods and services at like 80% of their competitors prices just to drive them out of business and then raise the price to like 110% of what their competitor charged. If another business stepped forward, they'd just lower the price again to drive them out of business.
You call selling below cost smart? Lol.
If it drives competition out of business and you can take the hit then yes, and that's just what they did.
The competition simply buys the product you try to sell below cost, and you go bust. This is not what they did though, and you are spreading lies.
No it's still above cost (from what I got out of it) so say it's a $0.50 idk choc. bar (cost from distributor) the ma and pa store sells it for $1 then Rockefeller and Carnegie come into town and start selling it for 80% of the ma and pa shop so $0.80 this now drives the ma and pa store out while still giving R and C a healthy profit margin.
Quote from: Piotr on December 07, 2013, 07:29:11 AM
The competition simply buys the product you try to sell below cost, and you go bust. This is not what they did though, and you are spreading lies.
Quote from: Mattao19 on December 07, 2013, 11:02:15 AM
No it's still above cost (from what I got out of it) so say it's a $0.50 idk choc. bar (cost from distributor) the ma and pa store sells it for $1 then Rockefeller and Carnegie come into town and start selling it for 80% of the ma and pa shop so $0.80 this now drives the ma and pa store out while still giving R and C a healthy profit margin.
I just imagined some dude going into a little mom and pops store and grabbing like all the chocolates from their shelves and then selling them for $0.20 higher...
Quote from: Piotr on December 07, 2013, 07:29:11 AMThis is not what they did though, and you are spreading lies.
Sorry, I forgot that you know better than textbooks and the American education system.
Quote from: Vileo on December 07, 2013, 04:46:03 PM
Quote from: Piotr on December 07, 2013, 07:29:11 AM
The competition simply buys the product you try to sell below cost, and you go bust. This is not what they did though, and you are spreading lies.
Quote from: Mattao19 on December 07, 2013, 11:02:15 AM
No it's still above cost (from what I got out of it) so say it's a $0.50 idk choc. bar (cost from distributor) the ma and pa store sells it for $1 then Rockefeller and Carnegie come into town and start selling it for 80% of the ma and pa shop so $0.80 this now drives the ma and pa store out while still giving R and C a healthy profit margin.
I just imagined some dude going into a little mom and pops store and grabbing like all the chocolates from their shelves and then selling them for $0.20 higher...
Why would one do that? That just turns the ma and pa shop into the distributor lol you wouldn't be stealing customers youd just become the customer lol
Quote from: Mattao19 on December 07, 2013, 11:02:15 AM
No it's still above cost (from what I got out of it) so say it's a $0.50 idk choc. bar (cost from distributor) the ma and pa store sells it for $1 then Rockefeller and Carnegie come into town and start selling it for 80% of the ma and pa shop so $0.80 this now drives the ma and pa store out while still giving R and C a healthy profit margin.
Basically, but also Carnegie and Rockefeller also had bigger businesses than Ma and Pop stores so they got their supplies cheaper by buying in huge bulk. Ma and Pa would buy maybe 100 units of something at $0.50 a pop and sell them for $1, making $50. Big businesses would buy 1,000,000 units of something and distribute it to their stores at say $0.40, sell it at $0.80 and still make a lot more than Ma and Pa. And to Piotr's, "The competition simply buys the product you try to sell below cost, and you go bust." point, Ma and Pa were usually just getting by, they didn't have the money to buy all of Big Business's products. Even if they did they would get it from a supplier for $0.50/unit and not from Big Business for $0.80./unit.
what terrible person would want to ruin the livelihood of two small town, middle class store owners that are just trying to make a living? honestly...
I'm just waiting for Agrus to be temp banned!
Quote from: Mlerner12 on December 07, 2013, 06:33:41 PM
I'm just waiting for Agrus to be temp banned!
Why would be get bAnned?
Because it looks like the topic is turning into a heated debate and we just saw Piotr ban someone.
Quote from: IceScythe on December 07, 2013, 06:32:53 PM
what terrible person would want to ruin the livelihood of two small town, middle class store owners that are just trying to make a living? honestly...
It's called Wal-Mart and they do it all the time. I believe in Capitalism. 'MURICA! But i do shop at mom and pop stores to keep the dream alive.
Quote from: Spencer Addington on December 07, 2013, 06:42:08 PM
Because it looks like the topic is turning into a heated debate and we just saw Piotr ban someone.
He banned someone?
Quote from: Mattao19 on December 07, 2013, 06:58:16 PM
Quote from: Spencer Addington on December 07, 2013, 06:42:08 PM
Because it looks like the topic is turning into a heated debate and we just saw Piotr ban someone.
He banned someone?
7 day ban on a different thread. I know mlerner saw it so I said we :)
Quote from: Butch1977 on December 07, 2013, 06:46:06 PM
Quote from: IceScythe on December 07, 2013, 06:32:53 PM
what terrible person would want to ruin the livelihood of two small town, middle class store owners that are just trying to make a living? honestly...
It's called Wal-Mart and they do it all the time. I believe in Capitalism. 'MURICA! But i do shop at mom and pop stores to keep the dream alive.
im not talking about a big business out to make more money, what you were talking about was a business whose only goal was to put that little store out of business, seems like a bad goal to have if you ask me.
Quote from: Spencer Addington on December 07, 2013, 07:01:12 PM
Quote from: Mattao19 on December 07, 2013, 06:58:16 PM
Quote from: Spencer Addington on December 07, 2013, 06:42:08 PM
Because it looks like the topic is turning into a heated debate and we just saw Piotr ban someone.
He banned someone?
7 day ban on a different thread. I know mlerner saw it so I said we :)
Same as boring anarchy2 a few months ago.
Quote from: Mlerner12 on December 07, 2013, 06:33:41 PM
I'm just waiting for Agrus to be temp banned!
Wouldn't be the first time I've gotten close... Although I hope that Piotr understands that I am just presenting facts and my opinion on those facts. Just because I think I'm right, doesn't mean I am and the same holds true for EVERYONE else.
You're allowed to disagree with Piotr all you want. He won't ban you for that. He'll ban you if you start insulting or blatantly disrespecting him in the process, which is what happened in the other thread.
These are his forums, after all. This is essentially a social gathering in his living room. You can disagree with what the host says with all the vigor in your blood, but when you throw his own wine (that he was kind enough to open a bottle of just for us) back in his face, you'll be escorted out.
I don't like these bans. I've said it before, I'll say it again. But I lose any ability or position to object or stand against it when they blatantly disrespect our host. Can't we just keep it civil, please?
Argus is fine. He keeps it cool.
I don't doubt for a second that ConanEdo's ban was justifies and I know this is just a simple disagreement :) No insult has been throw or disrespect hurdle.
I have made this one-time account to defend myself and also to question this idea that I was the only one who was uncivil or even the one who injected incivility into the conversation. After that I will respect the ban Here is the entire exchange btw:
QuoteConanedo:
Yup, those shorter work weeks, better working conditions, and other improvements in the lives of everyday men and women sure was socialist trade unions failing :P
QuotePiotr:
Not at all, those were byproduct of technological progress. Unions just slowed the inevitable. If you claim that unions gave those to us, you will be tried for lying on my forum. Do you claim that?
The only thing we as consumers and employees need is competition between producers and employers. Unions stifle that, proven by 150 years of history and solid science, Nobel prizes and all.
QuoteConanedo:
(this is in response to another person)
Yes they did. Read speeches and memoirs about the Liberal reforms at the beginning of the twentieth century. One of the major concerns was the rise of Labour and trade unions and losing power to both them and socialism if reforms were not made. To say they accomplished nothing is silly. The same goes for the United States. Hell, Germany was run by Social Democrats, who helped establish the moden welfare state.
QuotePiotr:
Oh, they helped establish plenty of evil things. You are correct that Hitler was a Socialist, but I'm not sure he and his Socialist Germany is something to be proud of?
QuoteConanedo:
I was referring to the party that held power around the turn of the 20th century. Hitler executed and persecuted members of the SDP and that comment is an insult to those whom he murdered. Perhaps if you weren't in such a hurry to hate socialism you'd make less ignorant statements.
QuotePiotr:
Hitler was a democratically elected leader of National Socialist German Workers Party. He was a Socialist. This is an objective truth.
Your statements are insult to all people able to think logically, and you are treading a very thin ice.
QuoteConanedo:
Hitler was a fascist, quite a different ideology, and was concerned with matters of fanatic nationalism and race. Socialism, as described by the SDP, is about class and the brotherhood of workers beyond the boundaries of the state. Again, do your research and you wouldn't make these mistakes.
However, seeing as you have threatened executive action both here and on PM, I will acquiesce to your request to stop saying things you don't like.
QuotePiotr:
LOL. Fascists are Socialists, you dare to insult my political knowledge without knowing the very basics yourself. German economy during the time of Hitler was run in a Socialist manner, this is an objective fact.
Whatever the crooks from SDP described themselves as or what their intentions were doesn't matter at all, what matters was that they ruined German economy by implementing Socialism. As far as economy goes, there is not significant difference between SDP or NSDAP or any other Socialist party. They rob the people of their wealth and redistribute it under false pretences.
You insult me suggesting that my research is inadequate, I spent 20 years studying Socialism in its various forms. If you want to keep posting on this forum, do it in a civilised manner. Do not lie. I'm not interested in your opinions about myself, but if you insist on sharing these I'll let you know that I divide people advocating Socialisms into two groups: morons or crooks.
Now, if you would read this, I would say that Piotr is the aggressor. He started off by threatening to put me on trial for a commonly held belief (the Unions provided many benefits to workers). He then goes on to insult a group of people I hold in high regard by comparing them to Hitler, and making a very dubious assertion (that the SDP was affiliated with the Nazis) in the process. I called him on that, though perhaps I could have been a bit more civil. He then goes on say that everything I've said is completely illogical (despite everything I've said being backed by academic research), and then calls me a moron for having the audacity to disagree with him. I challenge anyone to find much more incivility than calling one of his statements ignorant, when it could have been disproved with five minutes of light googling. Yet despite all this, my one sarcastic remark at being strong-armed into agreeing with Piotr is somehow the highmark of incivility and worthy of a ban. I respect you Gorzo, but I don't feel your analogy applies to me. I disagreed with him, only to be called a liar, a moron, and completely against logic. Sorry if I got a little angry as a result.
Quote from: ConanEdothedefendant on December 07, 2013, 09:39:30 PM
I have made this one-time account to defend myself and also to question this idea that I was the only one who was uncivil or even the one who injected incivility into the conversation. After that I will respect the ban Here is the entire exchange btw:
QuoteConanedo:
Yup, those shorter work weeks, better working conditions, and other improvements in the lives of everyday men and women sure was socialist trade unions failing :P
QuotePiotr:
Not at all, those were byproduct of technological progress. Unions just slowed the inevitable. If you claim that unions gave those to us, you will be tried for lying on my forum. Do you claim that?
The only thing we as consumers and employees need is competition between producers and employers. Unions stifle that, proven by 150 years of history and solid science, Nobel prizes and all.
QuoteConanedo:
(this is in response to another person)
Yes they did. Read speeches and memoirs about the Liberal reforms at the beginning of the twentieth century. One of the major concerns was the rise of Labour and trade unions and losing power to both them and socialism if reforms were not made. To say they accomplished nothing is silly. The same goes for the United States. Hell, Germany was run by Social Democrats, who helped establish the moden welfare state.
QuotePiotr:
Oh, they helped establish plenty of evil things. You are correct that Hitler was a Socialist, but I'm not sure he and his Socialist Germany is something to be proud of?
QuoteConanedo:
I was referring to the party that held power around the turn of the 20th century. Hitler executed and persecuted members of the SDP and that comment is an insult to those whom he murdered. Perhaps if you weren't in such a hurry to hate socialism you'd make less ignorant statements.
QuotePiotr:
Hitler was a democratically elected leader of National Socialist German Workers Party. He was a Socialist. This is an objective truth.
Your statements are insult to all people able to think logically, and you are treading a very thin ice.
QuoteConanedo:
Hitler was a fascist, quite a different ideology, and was concerned with matters of fanatic nationalism and race. Socialism, as described by the SDP, is about class and the brotherhood of workers beyond the boundaries of the state. Again, do your research and you wouldn't make these mistakes.
However, seeing as you have threatened executive action both here and on PM, I will acquiesce to your request to stop saying things you don't like.
QuotePiotr:
LOL. Fascists are Socialists, you dare to insult my political knowledge without knowing the very basics yourself. German economy during the time of Hitler was run in a Socialist manner, this is an objective fact.
Whatever the crooks from SDP described themselves as or what their intentions were doesn't matter at all, what matters was that they ruined German economy by implementing Socialism. As far as economy goes, there is not significant difference between SDP or NSDAP or any other Socialist party. They rob the people of their wealth and redistribute it under false pretences.
You insult me suggesting that my research is inadequate, I spent 20 years studying Socialism in its various forms. If you want to keep posting on this forum, do it in a civilised manner. Do not lie. I'm not interested in your opinions about myself, but if you insist on sharing these I'll let you know that I divide people advocating Socialisms into two groups: morons or crooks.
Now, if you would read this, I would say that Piotr is the aggressor. He started off by threatening to put me on trial for a commonly held belief (the Unions provided many benefits to workers). He then goes on to insult a group of people I hold in high regard by comparing them to Hitler, and making a very dubious assertion (that the SDP was affiliated with the Nazis) in the process. I called him on that, though perhaps I could have been a bit more civil. He then goes on say that everything I've said is completely illogical (despite everything I've said being backed by academic research), and then calls me a moron for having the audacity to disagree with him. I challenge anyone to find much more incivility than calling one of his statements ignorant, when it could have been disproved with five minutes of light googling. Yet despite all this, my one sarcastic remark at being strong-armed into agreeing with Piotr is somehow the highmark of incivility and worthy of a ban. I respect you Gorzo, but I don't feel your analogy applies to me. I disagreed with him, only to be called a liar, a moron, and completely against logic. Sorry if I got a little angry as a result.
Cool story bro...
I sense a conflict brewing...
Quote from: Mlerner12 on December 07, 2013, 10:14:28 PM
Quote from: Spencer Addington on December 07, 2013, 10:05:51 PM
Quote from: Mlerner12 on December 07, 2013, 10:04:06 PM
Quote from: Spencer Addington on December 07, 2013, 09:51:48 PM
Quote from: Mlerner12 on December 07, 2013, 09:50:06 PM
I sense a conflict brewing...
Nawwww
What WAS I thinking?
Umm.... Tacos?
SPAGHETTI TACOS, to be precise.
Italian + Mexican, you sir just combined my two favorite food groups
Quote from: IceScythe on December 07, 2013, 10:15:09 PM
Quote from: Mlerner12 on December 07, 2013, 10:14:28 PM
Quote from: Spencer Addington on December 07, 2013, 10:05:51 PM
Quote from: Mlerner12 on December 07, 2013, 10:04:06 PM
Quote from: Spencer Addington on December 07, 2013, 09:51:48 PM
Quote from: Mlerner12 on December 07, 2013, 09:50:06 PM
I sense a conflict brewing...
Nawwww
What WAS I thinking?
Umm.... Tacos?
SPAGHETTI TACOS, to be precise.
Italian + Mexican, you sir just combined my two favorite food groups
DELICIOUS ❤️❤️
Quote from: Mlerner12 on December 07, 2013, 10:14:28 PM
Quote from: Spencer Addington on December 07, 2013, 10:05:51 PM
Quote from: Mlerner12 on December 07, 2013, 10:04:06 PM
Quote from: Spencer Addington on December 07, 2013, 09:51:48 PM
Quote from: Mlerner12 on December 07, 2013, 09:50:06 PM
I sense a conflict brewing...
Nawwww
What WAS I thinking?
Umm.... Tacos?
SPAGHETTI TACOS, to be precise.
Spaghetti tacos sound delicious!!!! Don't you just hate when the noodles fall out of the shell.... Or the marinara makes the soggy.
Quote from: Mlerner12 on December 07, 2013, 10:16:07 PM
Quote from: IceScythe on December 07, 2013, 10:15:09 PM
Quote from: Mlerner12 on December 07, 2013, 10:14:28 PM
Quote from: Spencer Addington on December 07, 2013, 10:05:51 PM
Quote from: Mlerner12 on December 07, 2013, 10:04:06 PM
Quote from: Spencer Addington on December 07, 2013, 09:51:48 PM
Quote from: Mlerner12 on December 07, 2013, 09:50:06 PM
I sense a conflict brewing...
Nawwww
What WAS I thinking?
Umm.... Tacos?
SPAGHETTI TACOS, to be precise.
Italian + Mexican, you sir just combined my two favorite food groups
DELICIOUS ❤️❤️
INDUBITABLY!
Quote from: IceScythe on December 07, 2013, 10:16:49 PM
Quote from: Mlerner12 on December 07, 2013, 10:16:07 PM
Quote from: IceScythe on December 07, 2013, 10:15:09 PM
Quote from: Mlerner12 on December 07, 2013, 10:14:28 PM
Quote from: Spencer Addington on December 07, 2013, 10:05:51 PM
Quote from: Mlerner12 on December 07, 2013, 10:04:06 PM
Quote from: Spencer Addington on December 07, 2013, 09:51:48 PM
Quote from: Mlerner12 on December 07, 2013, 09:50:06 PM
I sense a conflict brewing...
Nawwww
What WAS I thinking?
Umm.... Tacos?
SPAGHETTI TACOS, to be precise.
Italian + Mexican, you sir just combined my two favorite food groups
DELICIOUS ❤️❤️
INDUBITABLY!
But only noodles, sauce, and bits of meat to make it best ;)
Quote from: Mlerner12 on December 07, 2013, 10:17:24 PM
Quote from: IceScythe on December 07, 2013, 10:16:49 PM
Quote from: Mlerner12 on December 07, 2013, 10:16:07 PM
Quote from: IceScythe on December 07, 2013, 10:15:09 PM
Quote from: Mlerner12 on December 07, 2013, 10:14:28 PM
Quote from: Spencer Addington on December 07, 2013, 10:05:51 PM
Quote from: Mlerner12 on December 07, 2013, 10:04:06 PM
Quote from: Spencer Addington on December 07, 2013, 09:51:48 PM
Quote from: Mlerner12 on December 07, 2013, 09:50:06 PM
I sense a conflict brewing...
Nawwww
What WAS I thinking?
Umm.... Tacos?
SPAGHETTI TACOS, to be precise.
Italian + Mexican, you sir just combined my two favorite food groups
DELICIOUS ❤️❤️
INDUBITABLY!
But only noodles, sauce, and bits of meat to make it best ;)
OH! but good sir, you must not forget the various cheeses!!!
Quote from: IceScythe on December 07, 2013, 10:18:49 PM
Quote from: Mlerner12 on December 07, 2013, 10:17:24 PM
Quote from: IceScythe on December 07, 2013, 10:16:49 PM
Quote from: Mlerner12 on December 07, 2013, 10:16:07 PM
Quote from: IceScythe on December 07, 2013, 10:15:09 PM
Quote from: Mlerner12 on December 07, 2013, 10:14:28 PM
Quote from: Spencer Addington on December 07, 2013, 10:05:51 PM
Quote from: Mlerner12 on December 07, 2013, 10:04:06 PM
Quote from: Spencer Addington on December 07, 2013, 09:51:48 PM
Quote from: Mlerner12 on December 07, 2013, 09:50:06 PM
I sense a conflict brewing...
Nawwww
What WAS I thinking?
Umm.... Tacos?
SPAGHETTI TACOS, to be precise.
Italian + Mexican, you sir just combined my two favorite food groups
DELICIOUS ❤️❤️
INDUBITABLY!
But only noodles, sauce, and bits of meat to make it best ;)
OH! but good sir, you must not forget the various cheeses!!!
"..THE VARIOUS CHEESES.."
Quote from: DylanW18 on December 07, 2013, 10:23:20 PM
Quote from: IceScythe on December 07, 2013, 10:18:49 PM
Quote from: Mlerner12 on December 07, 2013, 10:17:24 PM
Quote from: IceScythe on December 07, 2013, 10:16:49 PM
Quote from: Mlerner12 on December 07, 2013, 10:16:07 PM
Quote from: IceScythe on December 07, 2013, 10:15:09 PM
Quote from: Mlerner12 on December 07, 2013, 10:14:28 PM
Quote from: Spencer Addington on December 07, 2013, 10:05:51 PM
Quote from: Mlerner12 on December 07, 2013, 10:04:06 PM
Quote from: Spencer Addington on December 07, 2013, 09:51:48 PM
Quote from: Mlerner12 on December 07, 2013, 09:50:06 PM
I sense a conflict brewing...
Nawwww
What WAS I thinking?
Umm.... Tacos?
SPAGHETTI TACOS, to be precise.
Italian + Mexican, you sir just combined my two favorite food groups
DELICIOUS ❤️❤️
INDUBITABLY!
But only noodles, sauce, and bits of meat to make it best ;)
OH! but good sir, you must not forget the various cheeses!!!
"..THE VARIOUS CHEESES.."
THE
VARIOUS
CHEESES
To clarify a disputed fact from Piotr and ConanEdo's argument:
Fascism-"a governmental system led by a dictator having complete power, forcibly suppressing opposition and criticism, regimenting all industry, commerce, etc., and emphasizing an aggressive nationalism and often racism."
Socialism-"a theory or system of social organization that advocates the vesting of the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, of capital, land, etc., in the community as a whole."
I think some confusion stemmed from the fact that in fascism, as in socialism, there is a command economy. Although I think that it important to point out that fascism is DICTATOR run and socialism is run by, to quote the definition, "the community as a whole."
Definitions courtesy of Dictionary.com
Quote from: IceScythe on December 07, 2013, 10:26:12 PM
Quote from: DylanW18 on December 07, 2013, 10:23:20 PM
Quote from: IceScythe on December 07, 2013, 10:18:49 PM
Quote from: Mlerner12 on December 07, 2013, 10:17:24 PM
Quote from: IceScythe on December 07, 2013, 10:16:49 PM
Quote from: Mlerner12 on December 07, 2013, 10:16:07 PM
Quote from: IceScythe on December 07, 2013, 10:15:09 PM
Quote from: Mlerner12 on December 07, 2013, 10:14:28 PM
Quote from: Spencer Addington on December 07, 2013, 10:05:51 PM
Quote from: Mlerner12 on December 07, 2013, 10:04:06 PM
Quote from: Spencer Addington on December 07, 2013, 09:51:48 PM
Quote from: Mlerner12 on December 07, 2013, 09:50:06 PM
I sense a conflict brewing...
Nawwww
What WAS I thinking?
Umm.... Tacos?
SPAGHETTI TACOS, to be precise.
Italian + Mexican, you sir just combined my two favorite food groups
DELICIOUS ❤️❤️
INDUBITABLY!
But only noodles, sauce, and bits of meat to make it best ;)
OH! but good sir, you must not forget the various cheeses!!!
"..THE VARIOUS CHEESES.."
THE
VARIOUS
CHEESES
Quote from: Agrus Kos, Enforcer of Truth on December 07, 2013, 10:26:17 PM
To clarify a disputed fact from Piotr and ConanEdo's argument:
Fascism-"a governmental system led by a dictator having complete power, forcibly suppressing opposition and criticism, regimenting all industry, commerce, etc., and emphasizing an aggressive nationalism and often racism."
Socialism-"a theory or system of social organization that advocates the vesting of the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, of capital, land, etc., in the community as a whole."
I think some confusion stemmed from the fact that in fascism, as in socialism, there is a command economy. Although I think that it important to point out that fascism is DICTATOR run and socialism is run by, to quote the definition, "the community as a whole."
Definitions courtesy of Dictionary.com
but is it really, Spencer? is it really run by the community as a whole?
Quote from: IceScythe on December 07, 2013, 10:29:35 PM
Quote from: Agrus Kos, Enforcer of Truth on December 07, 2013, 10:26:17 PM
To clarify a disputed fact from Piotr and ConanEdo's argument:
Fascism-"a governmental system led by a dictator having complete power, forcibly suppressing opposition and criticism, regimenting all industry, commerce, etc., and emphasizing an aggressive nationalism and often racism."
Socialism-"a theory or system of social organization that advocates the vesting of the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, of capital, land, etc., in the community as a whole."
I think some confusion stemmed from the fact that in fascism, as in socialism, there is a command economy. Although I think that it important to point out that fascism is DICTATOR run and socialism is run by, to quote the definition, "the community as a whole."
Definitions courtesy of Dictionary.com
but is it really, Spencer? is it really run by the community as a whole?
Firstly, who is Spencer? Secondly, yes. As soon it is not "run by the community as a whole" it ceases to be socialism. That is why many people, such as myself, are not "socialists" we are "democratic socialists". We believe in governing through popular majority. This model is similar to what the United States uses as its form of government, with the exception of the US having a market economy.
Quote from: IceScythe on December 07, 2013, 10:26:12 PM
Quote from: DylanW18 on December 07, 2013, 10:23:20 PM
Quote from: IceScythe on December 07, 2013, 10:18:49 PM
Quote from: Mlerner12 on December 07, 2013, 10:17:24 PM
Quote from: IceScythe on December 07, 2013, 10:16:49 PM
Quote from: Mlerner12 on December 07, 2013, 10:16:07 PM
Quote from: IceScythe on December 07, 2013, 10:15:09 PM
Quote from: Mlerner12 on December 07, 2013, 10:14:28 PM
Quote from: Spencer Addington on December 07, 2013, 10:05:51 PM
Quote from: Mlerner12 on December 07, 2013, 10:04:06 PM
Quote from: Spencer Addington on December 07, 2013, 09:51:48 PM
Quote from: Mlerner12 on December 07, 2013, 09:50:06 PM
I sense a conflict brewing...
Nawwww
What WAS I thinking?
Umm.... Tacos?
SPAGHETTI TACOS, to be precise.
Italian + Mexican, you sir just combined my two favorite food groups
DELICIOUS ❤️❤️
INDUBITABLY!
But only noodles, sauce, and bits of meat to make it best ;)
OH! but good sir, you must not forget the various cheeses!!!
"..THE VARIOUS CHEESES.."
THE
VARIOUS
CHEESES
T
H
E
V
A
R
I
O
U
S
C
H
E
E
S
E
S
!
!
!
I is spencer. Who's askin?!
Quote from: Spencer Addington on December 07, 2013, 10:38:44 PM
I is spencer. Who's askin?!
He quoted me and said "is it really Spencer?" so I was confused.
To clarify to Conan, I do agree that Piotr was overly aggressive towards him, and I don't mind saying so. He was, for sure, incredibly rude to you. But that's not a green-flag to be rude back. Keeping calm or walking away, or you can make Piotr piñata in your home and go at with a baseball bat until candy comes out his butt. But two wrongs never make a right.
(unless you're driving, then you need three wrong lefts to make a right)
Quote from: Gorzo on December 07, 2013, 10:53:40 PM
To clarify to Conan, I do agree that Piotr was overly aggressive towards him, and I don't mind saying so. He was, for sure, incredibly rude to you. But that's not a green-flag to be rude back. Keeping calm or walking away, or you can make Piotr piñata in your home and go at with a baseball bat until candy comes out his butt. But two wrongs never make a right.
(unless you're driving, then you need four wrong lefts to make a right)
I thought three lefts?
Quote from: IceScythe on December 07, 2013, 10:49:13 PM
Quote from: Agrus Kos, Enforcer of Truth on December 07, 2013, 10:41:30 PM
Quote from: Spencer Addington on December 07, 2013, 10:38:44 PM
I is spencer. Who's askin?!
He quoted me and said "is it really Spencer?" so I was confused.
haha.... names.... i forget them...
It's all good, I do the same all the time, even with my parents and close friends.
Quote from: Mlerner12 on December 07, 2013, 11:00:05 PM
Quote from: Gorzo on December 07, 2013, 10:53:40 PM
To clarify to Conan, I do agree that Piotr was overly aggressive towards him, and I don't mind saying so. He was, for sure, incredibly rude to you. But that's not a green-flag to be rude back. Keeping calm or walking away, or you can make Piotr piñata in your home and go at with a baseball bat until candy comes out his butt. But two wrongs never make a right.
(unless you're driving, then you need four wrong lefts to make a right)
I thought three lefts?
Whoops, you're right! Fixed my post :P not that bad joke is the important part. I'm too distracted by the Ohio st v Michigan st game.
Quote from: Agrus Kos, Enforcer of Truth on December 07, 2013, 11:04:14 PM
Quote from: IceScythe on December 07, 2013, 10:49:13 PM
Quote from: Agrus Kos, Enforcer of Truth on December 07, 2013, 10:41:30 PM
Quote from: Spencer Addington on December 07, 2013, 10:38:44 PM
I is spencer. Who's askin?!
He quoted me and said "is it really Spencer?" so I was confused.
haha.... names.... i forget them...
It's all good, I do the same all the time, even with my parents and close friends.
:D im simply terrible at remembering names, the fact that yours was right beside the quote button just makes it worse...
Quote from: Gorzo on December 07, 2013, 11:27:42 PM
Quote from: Mlerner12 on December 07, 2013, 11:00:05 PM
Quote from: Gorzo on December 07, 2013, 10:53:40 PM
To clarify to Conan, I do agree that Piotr was overly aggressive towards him, and I don't mind saying so. He was, for sure, incredibly rude to you. But that's not a green-flag to be rude back. Keeping calm or walking away, or you can make Piotr piñata in your home and go at with a baseball bat until candy comes out his butt. But two wrongs never make a right.
(unless you're driving, then you need four wrong lefts to make a right)
I thought three lefts?
Whoops, you're right! Fixed my post :P not that bad joke is the important part. I'm too distracted by the Ohio st v Michigan st game.
Lol matchup of the ages
Quote from: Agrus Kos, Enforcer of Truth on December 07, 2013, 10:26:17 PM
To clarify a disputed fact from Piotr and ConanEdo's argument:
Fascism-"a governmental system led by a dictator having complete power, forcibly suppressing opposition and criticism, regimenting all industry, commerce, etc., and emphasizing an aggressive nationalism and often racism."
Socialism-"a theory or system of social organization that advocates the vesting of the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, of capital, land, etc., in the community as a whole."
I think some confusion stemmed from the fact that in fascism, as in socialism, there is a command economy. Although I think that it important to point out that fascism is DICTATOR run and socialism is run by, to quote the definition, "the community as a whole."
Definitions courtesy of Dictionary.com
Socialism is a way of running the economy and is opposite of free market. Do not confuse it with the way the government is selected.
You can have Socialism in democracy, republic or monarchy all the same. Hitler and Mussolini and SDP were running socialist economies, same as Stalin, Lenin, Pol-Pot, Mao, Tito, and the modern Korean dynasty in the north of the country. Same as Peoples Republic of Poland of 1970s I was born in, same as United Kingdom of 2004 I moved to. Obama is implementing socialism as hard as he can.
Quote from: Piotr on December 08, 2013, 06:07:59 AM
Quote from: Agrus Kos, Enforcer of Truth on December 07, 2013, 10:26:17 PM
To clarify a disputed fact from Piotr and ConanEdo's argument:
Fascism-"a governmental system led by a dictator having complete power, forcibly suppressing opposition and criticism, regimenting all industry, commerce, etc., and emphasizing an aggressive nationalism and often racism."
Socialism-"a theory or system of social organization that advocates the vesting of the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, of capital, land, etc., in the community as a whole."
I think some confusion stemmed from the fact that in fascism, as in socialism, there is a command economy. Although I think that it important to point out that fascism is DICTATOR run and socialism is run by, to quote the definition, "the community as a whole."
Definitions courtesy of Dictionary.com
Socialism is a way of running the economy and is opposite of free market. Do not confuse it with the way the government is selected.
Communism is strictly the economic system, socialism is kind of an economic system and a vague governmental idea, and because of this oddity many "socialists" define themselves as "social democrats". It is has a command theory, but because the definition says "a theory or system of social organization", it is kind of considered both.
Communism, as show in the Communist Manifesto, is to be achieved by creating a government and then following a series of steps called the "Ten Planks of Communism" with the final result being a communist state. Socialism is achieved by starting with that goverment and only following some of the "Ten Planks", but depending on which you follow you could still have a variation on the original government Marx described as opposed to communism which calls for anarchy.
Quote from: Agrus Kos, Enforcer of Truth on December 08, 2013, 10:39:19 AM
Quote from: Piotr on December 08, 2013, 06:07:59 AM
Quote from: Agrus Kos, Enforcer of Truth on December 07, 2013, 10:26:17 PM
To clarify a disputed fact from Piotr and ConanEdo's argument:
Fascism-"a governmental system led by a dictator having complete power, forcibly suppressing opposition and criticism, regimenting all industry, commerce, etc., and emphasizing an aggressive nationalism and often racism."
Socialism-"a theory or system of social organization that advocates the vesting of the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, of capital, land, etc., in the community as a whole."
I think some confusion stemmed from the fact that in fascism, as in socialism, there is a command economy. Although I think that it important to point out that fascism is DICTATOR run and socialism is run by, to quote the definition, "the community as a whole."
Definitions courtesy of Dictionary.com
Socialism is a way of running the economy and is opposite of free market. Do not confuse it with the way the government is selected.
Communism is strictly the economic system, socialism is kind of an economic system and a vague governmental idea, and because of this oddity many "socialists" define themselves as "social democrats". It is has a command theory, but because the definition says "a theory or system of social organization", it is kind of considered both.
Communism, as show in the Communist Manifesto, is to be achieved by creating a government and then following a series of steps called the "Ten Planks of Communism" with the final result being a communist state. Socialism is achieved by starting with that goverment and only following some of the "Ten Planks", but depending on which you follow you could still have a variation on the original government Marx described as opposed to communism which calls for anarchy.
Socialism is a way of running the economy and is opposite of free market. Do not confuse it with the way the government is selected. We had socialism in Poland and the regime was anything but democratic. We have socialism in UK and the democracy here seems to be run in a fair enough way, by British standards which are very high.
Marx theorised that in the long run in democracy socialism will always triumph. I agree, the theory is well supported by experiment and the logical reason for it is that we are all needy and greedy and thus we are all vulnerable to lies of socialists. Unfortunately only some of us are smart enough to understand that socialism always leads to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shortage_economy and we vote for the socialists who lie or genuinely believe that socialism is good for the people. In democracy power is with the majority, which is the needy and greedy people.
Which government is better: the one which says it will do good things for you but fails or does the opposite, or the one which says it will do nothing at all to you and delivers? ;)
Quote from: Gorzo on December 07, 2013, 10:53:40 PM
He was, for sure, incredibly rude to you. But that's not a green-flag to be rude back.
You are talking nonsense here. Where's the logic?
If I was indeed rude*, it is absolutely a green flag to be rude back. What else should be my punishment? Death? Boycott of my app?
* no I wasn't.
Define your "rude", Taysby and Piotr. They could be different. For example my dad's is "Doing something he doesnt't want you go do." To me it's "doing something intentionally harmful to another mentally".
Quote from: Piotr on December 08, 2013, 04:35:46 PM
Quote from: Gorzo on December 07, 2013, 10:53:40 PM
He was, for sure, incredibly rude to you. But that's not a green-flag to be rude back.
You are talking nonsense here. Where's the logic?
If I was indeed rude*, it is absolutely a green flag to be rude back. What else should be my punishment? Death? Boycott of my app?
* no I wasn't.
Telling him his posts are "an insult to everyone who thinks logically" is pretty goddamn rude, man. You also slapped him with Absurdio Ad Hitlerum. I doubt he appreciated being compared to hitler out of the blue.
And I'd like to think we're above/mature enough to not punish a person for arguing or being rude. It's null. We can be an adult and move on.
And I'm not a fan of you using Reductio Ad Absurdum on me ;) I study fallacies for a hobby, please don't use them on me.
Quote from: Gorzo on December 08, 2013, 05:35:12 PM
Quote from: Piotr on December 08, 2013, 04:35:46 PM
Quote from: Gorzo on December 07, 2013, 10:53:40 PM
He was, for sure, incredibly rude to you. But that's not a green-flag to be rude back.
You are talking nonsense here. Where's the logic?
If I was indeed rude*, it is absolutely a green flag to be rude back. What else should be my punishment? Death? Boycott of my app?
* no I wasn't.
Telling him his posts are "an insult to everyone who thinks logically" is pretty goddamn rude, man. You also slapped him with Absurdio Ad Hitlerum. I doubt he appreciated being compared to hitler out of the blue.
And I'd like to think we're above/mature enough to not punish a person for arguing or being rude. It's null. We can be an adult and move on.
And I'm not a fan of you using Reductio Ad Absurdum on me ;) I study fallacies for a hobby, please don't use them on me.
Words of wisdom from the {Gorzoian Spirit Guide}.
Quote from: Mlerner12 on December 08, 2013, 05:42:54 PM
Quote from: Gorzo on December 08, 2013, 05:35:12 PM
Quote from: Piotr on December 08, 2013, 04:35:46 PM
Quote from: Gorzo on December 07, 2013, 10:53:40 PM
He was, for sure, incredibly rude to you. But that's not a green-flag to be rude back.
You are talking nonsense here. Where's the logic?
If I was indeed rude*, it is absolutely a green flag to be rude back. What else should be my punishment? Death? Boycott of my app?
* no I wasn't.
Telling him his posts are "an insult to everyone who thinks logically" is pretty goddamn rude, man. You also slapped him with Absurdio Ad Hitlerum. I doubt he appreciated being compared to hitler out of the blue.
And I'd like to think we're above/mature enough to not punish a person for arguing or being rude. It's null. We can be an adult and move on.
And I'm not a fan of you using Reductio Ad Absurdum on me ;) I study fallacies for a hobby, please don't use them on me.
Words of wisdom from the {Gorzoian Spirit Guide}.
Cool card
Quote from: Spencer Addington on December 08, 2013, 05:59:30 PM
Quote from: Mlerner12 on December 08, 2013, 05:42:54 PM
Quote from: Gorzo on December 08, 2013, 05:35:12 PM
Quote from: Piotr on December 08, 2013, 04:35:46 PM
Quote from: Gorzo on December 07, 2013, 10:53:40 PM
He was, for sure, incredibly rude to you. But that's not a green-flag to be rude back.
You are talking nonsense here. Where's the logic?
If I was indeed rude*, it is absolutely a green flag to be rude back. What else should be my punishment? Death? Boycott of my app?
* no I wasn't.
Telling him his posts are "an insult to everyone who thinks logically" is pretty goddamn rude, man. You also slapped him with Absurdio Ad Hitlerum. I doubt he appreciated being compared to hitler out of the blue.
And I'd like to think we're above/mature enough to not punish a person for arguing or being rude. It's null. We can be an adult and move on.
And I'm not a fan of you using Reductio Ad Absurdum on me ;) I study fallacies for a hobby, please don't use them on me.
Words of wisdom from the {Gorzoian Spirit Guide}.
Cool card
Exile it and add {U} to your mana pool!!
Quote from: Piotr on December 08, 2013, 01:56:04 PM
Which government is better: the one which says it will do good things for you but fails or does the opposite, or the one which says it will do nothing at all to you and delivers? ;)
The one that says they'd do nothing- at least then I don't get my hopes up and act more accordingly to the ACTUAL situation. ;)
Quote from: Piotr on December 08, 2013, 01:56:04 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shortage_economy
I thought you were cool, and then you bring this nonsense.
I was really hoping for some actually credable.
Quote from: Ertai on December 08, 2013, 06:15:33 PM
Quote from: Piotr on December 08, 2013, 01:56:04 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shortage_economy
I thought you were cool, and then you bring this nonsense.
I was really hoping for some actually credable.
Not a fan of the all powerful Wiki? Death to the non-believer!!!
Quote from: Ertai on December 08, 2013, 06:15:33 PM
Quote from: Piotr on December 08, 2013, 01:56:04 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shortage_economy
I thought you were cool, and then you bring this nonsense.
I was really hoping for some actually credable.
Kornai, János, Socialist economy, Princeton University Press, 1992, ISBN 0-691-00393-9
Kornai, János, Economics of Shortage, Amsterdam: North Holland Press, Volume A, p. 27; Volume B, p. 196 .
Gomulka, Stanislaw: Kornai's Soft Budget Constraint and the Shortage Phenomenon: A Criticism and Restatement, in: Economics of Planning, Vol. 19. 1985. No. 1.
Planning Shortage and Transformation. Essays in Honor of Janos Kornai, Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 2000
Myant, Martin; Drahokoupil, Jan (2010), Transition Economies: Political Economy in Russia, Eastern Europe, and Central Asia, Wiley-Blackwell, ISBN 978-0-470-59619-7
The references are in full view ;)
Wayman, Mason - The Easiest Fake Ever, 2013. Article. The Biggest Liar.
The point is, Wikipedia is not allowed as a reference in schools for a reason. Because I can go on there right now and change any article to whatever I want and add my little reference there and no one would be the wiser.
In fact, I would have people like you copy and paste it so you would think its legit.
:D
Quote from: Ertai on December 08, 2013, 06:27:49 PM
Wayman, Mason - The Easiest Fake Ever, 2013. Article. The Biggest Liar.
The point is, Wikipedia is not allowed as a reference in schools for a reason. Because I can go on there right now and change any article to whatever I want and add my little reference there and no one would be the wiser.
In fact, I would have people like you copy and paste it so you would think its legit.
:D
Didn't they change it to where people couldn't do that anymore?
Quote from: Spencer Addington on December 08, 2013, 06:29:07 PM
Quote from: Ertai on December 08, 2013, 06:27:49 PM
Wayman, Mason - The Easiest Fake Ever, 2013. Article. The Biggest Liar.
The point is, Wikipedia is not allowed as a reference in schools for a reason. Because I can go on there right now and change any article to whatever I want and add my little reference there and no one would be the wiser.
In fact, I would have people like you copy and paste it so you would think its legit.
:D
Didn't they change it to where people couldn't do that anymore?
I have no idea. I haven't been in college for a while now. I don't go on there often, so I wouldn't know.
Quote from: Ertai on December 08, 2013, 06:27:49 PM
Wayman, Mason - The Easiest Fake Ever, 2013. Article. The Biggest Liar.
The point is, Wikipedia is not allowed as a reference in schools for a reason. Because I can go on there right now and change any article to whatever I want and add my little reference there and no one would be the wiser.
In fact, I would have people like you copy and paste it so you would think its legit.
:D
Although I agree that it's not the best way for truth if you check the sources it's great. Whenever I start essays I get background info from there and then look at the sources to make sure :P
Quote from: Ertai on December 08, 2013, 06:27:49 PM
Wayman, Mason - The Easiest Fake Ever, 2013. Article. The Biggest Liar.
The point is, Wikipedia is not allowed as a reference in schools for a reason. Because I can go on there right now and change any article to whatever I want and add my little reference there and no one would be the wiser.
In fact, I would have people like you copy and paste it so you would think its legit.
:D
95% of the hundreds of times I've used wiki I've crossed checked it many times and it's correct.
Brian Fantana: "They've done studies, you know. 60% of the time, it works every time."
[cheesy grin]
;)
Quote from: Ertai on December 08, 2013, 06:15:33 PM
Quote from: Piotr on December 08, 2013, 01:56:04 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shortage_economy
I thought you were cool, and then you bring this nonsense.
I was really hoping for some actually credable.
I was in that queue, we were queuing for toilet paper. Credible enough?
Quote from: Piotr on December 08, 2013, 07:39:57 PM
Quote from: Ertai on December 08, 2013, 06:15:33 PM
Quote from: Piotr on December 08, 2013, 01:56:04 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shortage_economy
I thought you were cool, and then you bring this nonsense.
I was really hoping for some actually credable.
I was in that queue, we were queuing for toilet paper. Credible enough?
While I cant testify to Piotr's experience, Wikipedia has actually been found to have fewer errors than Britanica. They have changed their policy so that you have to submit changes which are then checked. Shortage economy is real and is easily explained by the basics of economics. This is a flaw that results from multiple forms of economies all working differently. No system is perfect, even you have to admit that there are errors with nomocracy too.
Quote from: Agrus Kos, Enforcer of Truth on December 08, 2013, 08:17:09 PM
Quote from: Piotr on December 08, 2013, 07:39:57 PM
Quote from: Ertai on December 08, 2013, 06:15:33 PM
Quote from: Piotr on December 08, 2013, 01:56:04 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shortage_economy
I thought you were cool, and then you bring this nonsense.
I was really hoping for some actually credable.
I was in that queue, we were queuing for toilet paper. Credible enough?
While I cant testify to Piotr's experience, Wikipedia has actually been found to have fewer errors than Britanica. They have changed their policy so that you have to submit changes which are then checked. Shortage economy is real and is easily explained by the basics of economics. This is a flaw that results from multiple forms of economies all working differently. No system is perfect, even you have to admit that there are errors with nomocracy too.
I'm the first to admit that no system is perfect. However, it is proven that in economy Socialism is bad choice for people when compared to Free Market.
The inevitable shortage economy which socialism leads to is just the tip of the iceberg. Main main grudge with Socialism, these days, it that Socialism is immoral. It punishes people in prevention of crimes, such as punishing people for not having a car insurance, even if there was never any car accident and nobody got hurt. It purports that goal justifies the means. It completely ignores 'no victim, no crime' rule. Socialism does to people what they do not want to be done to themselves, even if they have done nothing to hurt others.
Opportunity makes a thief, in the long run Socialism destroys societies by decreasing the number of people who are honest. It does not make sense to be honest in Socialism, it is better to lie that you are weak, unable to work, in need, so you get freebies. Everyone is doing that, government allows that, so why not claim? So people vote for socialists and claim the benefits. The remaining population of honest people who pay taxes for the freebies shrinks, and shrinks, and shrinks, the work efficiency drops, and drops, and shortages come, always.
Queuing for 5 hours to get hold of toilet paper, can you imagine that in free market economy? Queues caused by shortages of everything were every day reality of living in Socialism implemented, and it had nothing to do with the government being evil, it had everything to do with the proven fact that socialsm fails miserably at resources allocation and always leads to shortages.
As for the Wikipedia - it contains true and false information. If Marx said one true thing among the lies, I'm not gonna hesitate to give him that. If Hitler got something right, I'm not gonna lie and say he was all wrong.
If Hitler did the same as your favourite Socialist party as far as running the economy goes, you have no right at all to get crossed if I compare your party economics policies to Hitler's, for this is a fact not a lie, and if you get crossed and in retaliation start being rude, you will be punished.
Eye for an eye is a very good rule but it works only once for each crime. It does not give the right of punishment to the punished. Some seem to fail to grasp this.
Quote from: Gorzo on December 08, 2013, 05:35:12 PM
Quote from: Piotr on December 08, 2013, 04:35:46 PM
Quote from: Gorzo on December 07, 2013, 10:53:40 PM
He was, for sure, incredibly rude to you. But that's not a green-flag to be rude back.
You are talking nonsense here. Where's the logic?
If I was indeed rude*, it is absolutely a green flag to be rude back. What else should be my punishment? Death? Boycott of my app?
* no I wasn't.
Telling him his posts are "an insult to everyone who thinks logically" is pretty goddamn rude, man.
Check your chronology, man. What was first, 'Perhaps if you weren't in such a hurry to hate socialism you'd make less ignorant statements.' or 'an insult to everyone who thinks logically'? :p
Does executing a murderer make you a murderer?
My entire point is that chronology doesn't matter. Rude is rude. We're adults, "he started it" is not a viable excuse.
Quote from: Gorzo on December 09, 2013, 12:52:24 PM
My entire point is that chronology doesn't matter. Rude is rude. We're adults, "he started it" is not a viable excuse.
Unless it's a gunfight or some other aggresive and harmful activity, because then you can claim self- defense.
Quote from: Mlerner12 on December 09, 2013, 01:02:12 PM
Quote from: Gorzo on December 09, 2013, 12:52:24 PM
My entire point is that chronology doesn't matter. Rude is rude. We're adults, "he started it" is not a viable excuse.
Unless it's a gunfight or some other aggresive and harmful activity, because then you can claim self- defense.
I'm not talking about a gunfight. I'm talking about rudeness. Squabbling. Insults. Verbal argument. I'm talking about what actually happened here. I'm talking about what is relevant to this situation, and only what is relevant to this situation.
Murder is not relevant to this conversation - no one died. Self defense is not relevant to this situation - no one was in danger in any way, shape, or form.
Quote from: Gorzo on December 09, 2013, 01:15:50 PM
Quote from: Mlerner12 on December 09, 2013, 01:02:12 PM
Quote from: Gorzo on December 09, 2013, 12:52:24 PM
My entire point is that chronology doesn't matter. Rude is rude. We're adults, "he started it" is not a viable excuse.
Unless it's a gunfight or some other aggresive and harmful activity, because then you can claim self- defense.
I'm not talking about a gunfight. I'm talking about rudeness. Squabbling. Insults. Verbal argument. I'm talking about what actually happened here. I'm talking about what is relevant to this situation, and only what is relevant to this situation.
Murder is not relevant to this conversation - no one died. Self defense is not relevant to this situation - no one was in danger in any way, shape, or form.
Fair enough, I humbly agree.
We should've kept Japan after WWII so now we could sell it to china and get the debt dropped
Quote from: Piotr on December 09, 2013, 02:36:09 PM
Quote from: Gorzo on December 09, 2013, 01:15:50 PM
Quote from: Mlerner12 on December 09, 2013, 01:02:12 PM
Quote from: Gorzo on December 09, 2013, 12:52:24 PM
My entire point is that chronology doesn't matter. Rude is rude. We're adults, "he started it" is not a viable excuse.
Unless it's a gunfight or some other aggresive and harmful activity, because then you can claim self- defense.
I'm not talking about a gunfight. I'm talking about rudeness. Squabbling. Insults. Verbal argument. I'm talking about what actually happened here. I'm talking about what is relevant to this situation, and only what is relevant to this situation.
Murder is not relevant to this conversation - no one died. Self defense is not relevant to this situation - no one was in danger in any way, shape, or form.
Fair enough, I humbly agree.
I have to say I was disappointed by a few of your abrupt responses in this thread but this statement was downright honorable. Thanks for showing both sides of your passion Piotr. Your tenacity about your beliefs is commendable but your humble response was even more so.