Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
AROCES

Obama: Recession could delay rescinding Bush

211 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

questionmark
What is this? Desent amoung the liberals??

Questionmark says gov spending is the only way to get us out of a recession and into prosperity.

Can't you guys agree on anything? ;)

And I have to say again that you are very good at attributing things to people they never said.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ninjadude
Tell you what: If you like a socialist economy why don't you move to Russia? It would be your paradise.

We've had this socialism discussion already with Aroces. There is a lot of socialist economies in the world. Very successfully. This is not the same as political socialism or even communism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ninjadude
forced socialism doesn't work. it isn't working in china where they have been living it for centuries.

When you grow up, you'll find that when you have a job, you are "forced" to pay into social security in the US. A very socialistic and successful policy. Socialism is not just a political philosphy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ninjadude
The poor are not even paying taxes now and actually taking money instead from the govt, now what made you think it is the poor who are paying majority of the taxes?

What is your source for "the port are not even paying taxes now"!!!! Of course they are paying taxes. And far too much for the level of their income.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ninjadude
Union of Soviet SOCIALIST Republic - Extinct!!!

A political distinction. ECONOMIC Socialism is very much alive and do quite well all over the world. Get it?!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AROCES
A political distinction. ECONOMIC Socialism is very much alive and do quite well all over the world. Get it?!

What excatly is an economic socialism compare to a capitalist economy?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AROCES
What is your source for "the port are not even paying taxes now"!!!! Of course they are paying taxes. And far too much for the level of their income.

And what is your source? Unless what you are refering to those poor who can't drive an SUV or not able to buy a 50 inch plasma.

Edited by AROCES

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AROCES
When you grow up, you'll find that when you have a job, you are "forced" to pay into social security in the US. A very socialistic and successful policy. Socialism is not just a political philosphy.

Isn't social security in danger of going bankrupt in few years for there will be more recepient that those putting into it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AROCES
Maybe you should read about or visit some European countries.

Yeah, I have read about those who leave their country for they get tired of paying 70% in taxes while seeing on the street all the free loaders doing nothing..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MasterPo
Maybe you should read about or visit some European countries.

So Europe has a growing prosperous economy without anyone getting rich?!?!?! :blink:

I'm from Missouri: Show me!

Show me the stats for a growing prosperous European country (or anywhere else for that matter) that has no one rich or becoming rich. And let's define "rich" as 25% or better income difference between the top and the bottom.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tiggs
So Europe has a growing prosperous economy without anyone getting rich?!?!?! :blink:

I'm from Missouri: Show me!

Show me the stats for a growing prosperous European country (or anywhere else for that matter) that has no one rich or becoming rich. And let's define "rich" as 25% or better income difference between the top and the bottom.

Ever heard of the Gini Coefficient?

The Gini coefficient is a measure of statistical dispersion most prominently used as a measure of inequality of income distribution or inequality of wealth distribution. It is defined as a ratio with values between 0 and 1: A low Gini coefficient indicates more equal income or wealth distribution, while a high Gini coefficient indicates more unequal distribution. 0 corresponds to perfect equality (everyone having exactly the same income) and 1 corresponds to perfect inequality (where one person has all the income, while everyone else has zero income). The Gini coefficient requires that no one have a negative net income or wealth. Worldwide, Gini coefficients range from approximately 0.232 in Denmark to 0.707 in Namibia.

The Gini index is the Gini coefficient expressed as a percentage, thus Denmark's Gini index is 23.2%

Overall, the EU has a Gini Index of 30.7%, whilst the US has a Gini Index of 45%.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
danielost
When you grow up, you'll find that when you have a job, you are "forced" to pay into social security in the US. A very socialistic and successful policy. Socialism is not just a political philosphy.

And going bankrupt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tiggs
Isn't social security in danger of going bankrupt in few years for there will be more recepient that those putting into it?

Not exactly.

From the article on Wikipedia:

According to most projections, the Social Security trust fund will begin drawing on its Treasury Notes toward the end of the next decade (around 2018 or 2019), at which time the repayment of these notes will have to be financed from the general fund. At some time thereafter, variously estimated as 2041 (by the Social Security Administration) or 2052 (by the Congressional Budget Office), the Social Security Trust Fund will have exhausted the claim on general revenues that had been built up during the years of surplus. At that point, current Social Security tax receipts would be sufficient to fund 74 or 78% of the promised benefits, according to the two respective projections. The Social Security Trustees suggest that either the payroll tax could increase to 16.41 percent in 2041 and steadily increased to 17.60 percent in 2081 or a cut in benefits by 25 percent in 2041 and steadily increased to an overall cut of 30 percent in 2081.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
questionmark
And going bankrupt.

You should learn a little more about the things you try to discuss: socialism cannot go bankrupt as money is not a means of economy but a means of exchange in it. (That does not make it good, though)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AROCES
You should learn a little more about the things you try to discuss: socialism cannot go bankrupt as money is not a means of economy but a means of exchange in it. (That does not make it good, though)

Like the USSR?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AROCES
* Sighs *

And who's job is it to legislate and regulate those banks, so this kind of thing doesn't happen?

Ask Barney Franks and Cris dodd why they blocked an attempt to regulate Fannie Mae when problems were starting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
questionmark
Like the USSR?

...was never socialistic, they were a state-capitalistic system, regardless of what they called themselves.... Sweden, Denmark and Norway are more socialistic then the USSR ever was.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AROCES
...was never socialistic, they were a state-capitalistic system, regardless of what they called themselves.... Sweden, Denmark and Norway are more socialistic then the USSR ever was.

Do you understand what it means when you call yourself the Union of SOCIALIST Republic?

You are starting to make yourself look silly here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dayne

Trickle down economics works depending who you are but I compare it to Merit Raises in corporations. We all know how fair that system is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
questionmark
Do you understand what it means when you call yourself the Union of SOCIALIST Republic?

You are starting to make yourself look silly here.

Yep, and the USA called itself democratic while more than half were not eligible to vote until 1920...names are just that NAMES. They could have called themselves Union of TRUCK Republics, it would not have changed what or who they were.

If you want to discuss Socialism read a book first.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tiggs
Ask Barney Franks and Cris dodd why they blocked an attempt to regulate Fannie Mae when problems were starting.

You make it sound like it was never regulated.

Fannie Mae, formally known as the Federal National Mortgage Association was regulated. By the Department of Urban Housing and Development which reported to Congress. A Republican Majority Congress.

And the person with the power to appoint Directors to the board of Fannie Mae? The President.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Space Commander Travis
What is this? Desent amoung the liberals??

Questionmark says gov spending is the only way to get us out of a recession and into prosperity.

Can't you guys agree on anything? ;)

What? You mean people are free to disagree with each other? You're right, what a ridiculously inefficient liberal trait. Under Palin's regime there will be no disagreement. All will agree. Is that how you'd prefer it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tiggs

A quick reminder to posters on this thread:

Please avoid Ad-hominem attacks - discuss the content of the posts, rather than the person making the post.

Thanks in advance,

Tiggs

[Forum Mod Team]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AROCES
Yep, and the USA called itself democratic while more than half were not eligible to vote until 1920...names are just that NAMES. They could have called themselves Union of TRUCK Republics, it would not have changed what or who they were.

If you want to discuss Socialism read a book first.

It's United States of America, not Democratic States of America.

Have you read a book about the USSR socialistic experiment that failed?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
questionmark
It's United States of America, not Democratic States of America.

Have you read a book about the USSR socialistic experiment that failed?

Socialism refers to a broad set of economic theories of social organization advocating collective ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods, and the creation of an egalitarian society. Modern socialism originated in the late nineteenth-century working class political movement. Karl Marx posited that socialism would be achieved via class struggle and a proletarian revolution which represents the transitional stage between capitalism and communism.

Where in the USSR were workers asked to give their opinion on the production or the means of the factory they worked in?

Where in the USSR were workers ever asked their opinion on the direction the government should take?

When in the USSR did the government ever ask the people how the production should be divided?

So, the USSR was never socialist, no matter what they called themselves.

To see that this is not my opinion please pick up one or more of the following books before spouting an uninformed opinion:

Newman, Michael. (2005) Socialism: A Very Short Introduction, Oxford University Press, ISBN 0-19-280431-6

"Socialism" Merriam-Webster. Merriam Webster Online.

"Socialism" Encyclopedia Britannica. 2006. Encyclopædia Britannica Online.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.