Democratic Socialism

[Farmer77]

1 hour ago, preacherman76 said:

To me though any government intended to create a situation where we don't have any struggles to survive is going to fail miserably. It just isn't natural.

I think that's a real mischaracterization of most people's views of socialist principles. Its simply become apparent that our system has devolved into an oligarchy where we the people have no say over national policy due to the power of corporations. 

 

1 hour ago, preacherman76 said:

There are lots of examples of that right now in dramatically poor area's. For the most part most of those people are not starving. Most have a roof over their heads, cloths on their backs, free health care (best in the country in fact) and they are also dangerous hell holes.

You don't really believe that best in the country part do you?

The best doctors don't accept Medicaid , the ones who do prioritize insurance patients over Medicaid and from personal experience I can tell you that if you're young and on Medicaid the very first  thought just about every practitioner you come across has is "this person is a junkie". 

1 hour ago, preacherman76 said:

Removing a persons ability to have better then what they have now is going to create a disaster. It will bring us all down to the lowest common denominator. Socialism just isn't the answer.

I really feel like this at its core is a straw man argument. We can simply reprioritize our absurd national budget by ignoring the army of lobbyists who dictate our way of life.

No need to even raise taxes......Speaking of which my accountant assured me that my tax liability will be several thousand dollars higher under Trumps plan so its not exactly like the oligarchy is leading to lower taxes. 

 

[Aquila King]

9 hours ago, MiskatonicGrad said:

Who do you think controls the government right now in this country? Or any country? The People? Maybe some people who have the means to every government in history has been corrupted in the end. If you would educate yourself on our original constitution our founders got it as near to right as humans can and we still managed to screw it up. Corporations increase profits by making a better product or at least they should in socialism they just get the government to require the population to buy their product. Or at least that is how Obama and Bush defined Socialism.

Unfortunately there's a glimmer of truth here, in that within our current system, corporations are able to buy politicians for political influence through legal bribes disguised as 'campaign contributions'.

However to say that most governments have been corrupt, does not suddenly mean that all governments must be corrupt by their very nature. Most nations throughout history had numerous human rights abuses throughout history as well, yet for the most part those abuses have been fully stamped out all throughout the civilized world.

What your philosophy appears to come down to is a serious case of nihilism, where everything is always corrupt by it's very nature and it is therefore meaningless to support anything. You're just complaining about this and that without offering any solutions.

[MiskatonicGrad]

3 hours ago, Aquila King said:

Unfortunately there's a glimmer of truth here, in that within our current system, corporations are able to buy politicians for political influence through legal bribes disguised as 'campaign contributions'.

However to say that most governments have been corrupt, does not suddenly mean that all governments must be corrupt by their very nature. Most nations throughout history had numerous human rights abuses throughout history as well, yet for the most part those abuses have been fully stamped out all throughout the civilized world.

What your philosophy appears to come down to is a serious case of nihilism, where everything is always corrupt by it's very nature and it is therefore meaningless to support anything. You're just complaining about this and that without offering any solutions.

Oh I have solutions but I didn't know we were talking about how to fix our representative republic. I thought we were explaining how socialism is a pox on human existence and is no where near the utopian society progressives try make it out to be. But whatever.

[+and-then]

18 hours ago, Hankenhunter said:

No you didn't. You flourished because people of like minds who who were of above average intelligence were driven out for their ideas and questions. Called heretics and demons. These are the people who formed cities. Cities are where the industrial revolutions started. Where people came to cities to express  themselves and build upon their ideas without being ostrasized. Without cities, you would still be living in backwoods hamlets and towns surrounded blissfully by your ignorance. Even the churches in these towns were socialist. Giving freely to the poor. Isn't that why you toss money in the basket at church? That's socialism. The root word of socialism  is social. People getting together. Conservatism is stagnation and isolation. Again, read some literature and educate yourself.

Hank

Liberalism REALLY IS a mental disorder... wow.  Let me ask you a simple question and try to keep any answer you feel like giving, equally simple, okay?  What gives a government the right to take from producers and give it to those who CHOOSE NOT TO BE PRODUCTIVE?  Because THAT is modern Socialism, regardless what word you preface it with.  In a humane culture, like we had under the Judeo-Christian ethos, the producers were willing to help the truly needy.  In return, the numbers of needy always expanded, ALWAYS.  Today there are literally millions of people in America that actually believe strongly that they are OWED all of the necessities of life.  THEN, a few extras so that everything can be "fair".  They've come to be child-like in their faith that there is a magic deity out there that can provide everything for them and if it has to be taken from others, they simply don't care.  They've been taught to hate productive, hard-working people who become well off financially.  Many of these dreamers actually believe that there is no way a person can prosper without doing something shady or outright illegal, therefore the "rich" are crooks and taking from them is doing God's work.  Wanna know how that ends, every time?  Have a look at Venezuela.  While you are pondering the absolute chaos, crime, and starvation, keep in mind that Venezuela sits on an oil reserve greater than Saudi Arabia currently has.  THAT, neighbor, is the fruit of Socialism.  

[+and-then]

13 hours ago, preacherman76 said:

Democratic socialism means folks like myself who climbed out of poverty get to go back in the hole. It means I get to have half my check stolen by government, while being told to shut up and check my privilege while I move back to the trailer park. 

Forget you and your socialism. You are a thief if you support it. 

STRAIGHT UP, SMOOTH AND TRUE!  Well done!

[Farmer77]

Just now, and then said:

Have a look at Venezuela.  While you are pondering the absolute chaos, crime, and starvation, keep in mind that Venezuela sits on an oil reserve greater than Saudi Arabia currently has.  THAT, neighbor, is the fruit of Socialism.  

Christ this canard again? 

When a tiny nation has the world's greatest superpower interfering in her affairs with the goal of sinking said nation its impossible to gauge the efficacy of that nation's government. 

[aztek]

Just now, Vlad the Mighty said:

The Christian principle that we should help those worse off than ourselves no longer applies, then? It's been superseded, perhaps ironically, by survival-of-the-fittest Darwinism? 

do not give man a fish, tech him how to catch one himself. 

[Sir Wearer of Hats]

Just now, aztek said:

do not give man a fish, tech him how to catch one himself. 

Yes, I remember Jesus feeding the 5,000 saying “this is how you cast your rod....”

[aztek]

Just now, Sir Wearer of Hats said:

Yes, I remember Jesus feeding the 5,000 saying “this is how you cast your rod....”

Jesus did not take half of someones food and gave it to others,  he used manna machine, either a miracle, or a tech left from higher civilizations.

[Farmer77]

Just now, aztek said:

Jesus did not take half of someones food and gave it to others,  he used manna machine, either a miracle, or a tech left from higher civilizations.

The first Christians were socialists, actually they were closer to communists to be honest 

[Farmer77]

 

All the believers were one in heart and mind. No one claimed that any of his possessions was his own, but they shared everything they had. . . . There were no needy persons among them. For from time to time those who owned lands or houses sold them, brought the money from the sales and put it at the apostles' feet, and it was distributed to anyone as he had need (Acts 4:32-35).
 

[preacherman76]

1 hour ago, Farmer77 said:

The first Christians were socialists, actually they were closer to communists to be honest 

And they quickly realized it didn't work.

[aztek]

1 hour ago, aztek said:

Jesus did not take half of someones food and gave it to others,  he used manna machine, either a miracle, or a tech left from higher civilizations.

oh wait, it was Moses in the desert, not Jesus.  but the point remains

[Aquila King]

3 hours ago, MiskatonicGrad said:

Oh I have solutions but I didn't know we were talking about how to fix our representative republic. I thought we were explaining how socialism is a pox on human existence and is no where near the utopian society progressives try make it out to be. But whatever.

That's a snarky little non-argument there.

[+and-then]

8 hours ago, Sir Wearer of Hats said:

Yes, I remember Jesus feeding the 5,000 saying “this is how you cast your rod....”

Yes, and He never left and hid Himself away from the huge crowds that began to appear so they could be fed or healed, did he?  Nowhere did He ever say that a man owed his neighbor a living.  Helping the destitute, the widow and the orphan were what He was about.  Not regularly feeding the masses so they didn't have to work.  And you KNOW that...

[Space Commander Travis]

9 hours ago, preacherman76 said:

And they quickly realized it didn't work.

so the first Christians, the ones who actually followed the words of Jesus that some of them at least had heard at first hand, were wrong, so therefore Jesus' teaching itself was hopelessly naive and could never work, and it needed the establishment of the Church to teach people the right way to do it?

Edited March 13, 2018 by Vlad the Mighty

[Sir Wearer of Hats]

10 hours ago, preacherman76 said:

And they quickly realized it didn't work.

No, people came along and said “I know better than you lot, I lead, you follow”. 

[MiskatonicGrad]

On 3/11/2018 at 11:21 PM, Hankenhunter said:

No you didn't. You flourished because people of like minds who who were of above average intelligence were driven out for their ideas and questions. Called heretics and demons. These are the people who formed cities. Cities are where the industrial revolutions started. Where people came to cities to express  themselves and build upon their ideas without being ostrasized. Without cities, you would still be living in backwoods hamlets and towns surrounded blissfully by your ignorance. Even the churches in these towns were socialist. Giving freely to the poor. Isn't that why you toss money in the basket at church? That's socialism. The root word of socialism  is social. People getting together. Conservatism is stagnation and isolation. Again, read some literature and educate yourself.

Hank

I really wasn't going to call you out on this but to say conservatism doesn't further the human condition is pure B.S..  just because a group of people get together and work for the common good does not make it socialism. Easy way to figure out where you stand. Conservatives will show you how to live. Socialists will tell you how to live. Most people live conservative lifestyles you yourself most likely do. If you save some of the money you earn try to live within your means. help out those you can. Take care of your family. Where socialism comes into play is when you see the guy down the street buy a Ferrari and think "how many families could have been fed. Well the government should do something to take his car and use that money to help society." Live your life and I will live mine. I don't want you or the government telling me or the company I work for what it should do with it's money. People are inherently good and tend to do the right thing the ones that don't are ostracized and end up living in caves not forming cities of liked minded individuals.

[preacherman76]

20 hours ago, Farmer77 said:

I think that's a real mischaracterization of most people's views of socialist principles. Its simply become apparent that our system has devolved into an oligarchy where we the people have no say over national policy due to the power of corporations. 

We could easily get rid of corporate influence if we the people even came close to agreeing about anything. We have been disarmed by division.

 

You don't really believe that best in the country part do you?

Its a lot better then what I get. My wife sees it all the time. Hard working people who are unable to afford hospice get turned away. The dirt poor walk right in without paying a cent. This is a hospice hospital. Easily the best care in the country

I really feel like this at its core is a straw man argument. We can simply reprioritize our absurd national budget by ignoring the army of lobbyists who dictate our way of life.

Again if we had any semblance of unity we could end that tomorrow. Its OUR fault corporations have so much influence.

No need to even raise taxes......Speaking of which my accountant assured me that my tax liability will be several thousand dollars higher under Trumps plan so its not exactly like the oligarchy is leading to lower taxes. 

 

Get a new accountant. Many people are going to see lower tax returns. That's cause they are paying considerably less taxes weekly or bi weekly or whatev.

Edited March 13, 2018 by preacherman76

[preacherman76]

2 hours ago, Vlad the Mighty said:

so the first Christians, the ones who actually followed the words of Jesus that some of them at least had heard at first hand, were wrong, so therefore Jesus' teaching itself was hopelessly naive and could never work, and it needed the establishment of the Church to teach people the right way to do it?

Jesus never endorsed socialism. The disciples came up with that all on their own after Jesus left. Jesus said if a man refuses to work he shouldn't eat. Which is much more harsh then the system we have now. And if you think taking digs at the church is going to offend me you are highly mistaken. I'm certain I have much worse things to say then you do. But then again the condition of the church was foretold long ago, by Christ himself.

Just curious, why are you bringing religion into this? You honestly think trying to shame me into being dirt poor again through a individual you obviously know little about is going to work? I mean if you want to bring religion into politics, I mean really see that as appropriate, then we'd have a lot of work to do, and it would involve much more then just our economic system. How far are you willing to go?

[Harte]

3 hours ago, Vlad the Mighty said:

so the first Christians, the ones who actually followed the words of Jesus that some of them at least had heard at first hand, were wrong, so therefore Jesus' teaching itself was hopelessly naive and could never work, and it needed the establishment of the Church to teach people the right way to do it?

There's a difference between a group of like-minded people adopting a socialistic practice and a government imposing a socialistic system on its people.

If you have to go all Jesus, then consider Jesus acknowledges the authority of Rome.

Harte

[Space Commander Travis]

3 hours ago, Sir Wearer of Hats said:

No, people came along and said “I know better than you lot, I lead, you follow”. 

They soon realised the value of calling themselves impressive things like Bishops and Popes, and how useful it was to them to insist that only they were capable of correct interpretation of what people thought Jesus or the Scriptures meant on any given subject.  

[Space Commander Travis]

3 hours ago, preacherman76 said:

Jesus never endorsed socialism. The disciples came up with that all on their own after Jesus left. Jesus said if a man refuses to work he shouldn't eat. Which is much more harsh then the system we have now. And if you think taking digs at the church is going to offend me you are highly mistaken. I'm certain I have much worse things to say then you do. But then again the condition of the church was foretold long ago, by Christ himself.

Just curious, why are you bringing religion into this? You honestly think trying to shame me into being dirt poor again through a individual you obviously know little about is going to work? I mean if you want to bring religion into politics, I mean really see that as appropriate, then we'd have a lot of work to do, and it would involve much more then just our economic system. How far are you willing to go?

It wasn't me that brought it up,it was someone (Farmer, was it?) who mentioned that Jesus recommended a communal lifestyle. I know he never said anything about that everyone should hand over to 60% of their earnings to the Government or whatever, althoguh he did, as we have seen, have a fairly pragmatic attitude toward people not rocking the boat unnecessarily with the civil authorities. 

[RavenHawk]

This was last night’s episode.  It just barely scratches the surface.  But it’s a thumb to the eye of Socialist Democracies and other archaic forms of government that try to restrict human nature and the individual.  I can guarantee that Aquila King (for one) will not understand it, nor like it.  It’s too much Bulls—t for him.  The Constitution is just utter nonsense.

 

[Harte]

That guy Aarn keeps emailing me.

Harte