MARCELL DAREUS POWER Posted September 2, 2012 Share Posted September 2, 2012 That's not necessarily untrue, the problem is that the opposition is even more into all those things, except the bedroom issue which I don't see picking up any mainstream support even within the party. The left may back off the bedroom (except for making me provide them with the bedroom, its furnishings, etc.) but they're awful antsy to get into every other area of my life. do you think tax is theft? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted September 2, 2012 Share Posted September 2, 2012 do you think tax is theft? It depends on the tax. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MARCELL DAREUS POWER Posted September 2, 2012 Share Posted September 2, 2012 (edited) either way, the modern dem party, is only pro labor in rhetoric, their record for at least 2/3 of that party is still pro business. clinton was a right wing neoliberal It depends on the tax. isnt that the point of democracy? win some lose some... Edited September 2, 2012 by MARCELL DAREUS POWER Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted September 2, 2012 Share Posted September 2, 2012 either way, the modern dem party, is only pro labor in rhetoric, their record for at least 2/3 of that party is still pro business Big Corporations. clinton was a right wing neoliberal fixed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CosmicBills Posted September 2, 2012 Share Posted September 2, 2012 I've put him on my customized "ignore" list. Middle finger salute everytime he posts: mlm Mlm ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MARCELL DAREUS POWER Posted September 2, 2012 Share Posted September 2, 2012 (edited) My primary question was how the hell you equate Obama's stimulus to anything Reagan did. And I'm well aware of the Nazis being fascist. Fascism is a close cousin to socialism. We could get into those distinctions if you like, but claiming Fascism is somehow related to private free enterprise capitalism is laughable. They justify the "right-wing" label based on militarism. But again, how is Obama's "stimulus" in any way similar to anything Reagan did? btw, i disagree, with what i think you mean by free enterprise... corporations are tyrannical/totalitarian institutions...they are not democratic. the state created this, not the market. Edited September 2, 2012 by MARCELL DAREUS POWER Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted September 2, 2012 Share Posted September 2, 2012 (edited) btw, i disagree, with what i think you mean by free enterprise... corporations are tyrannical/totalitarian institutions...they are not democratic. the state created this, not the market. Don't confuse creation with intervention. The difference between us is you support the interveners who seek to protect the corporations you demonize at the expense of the middle class and I support the removal of the intervention to allow the "little guy" to compete without having to jump over monumental hurdles put in his path by the government for the sake of protecting the politicians' cronies. I don't like it when Republicans do it either, but of late, Democrats are the biggest crony capitalists of them all. Edited September 2, 2012 by Rob's House Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted September 2, 2012 Share Posted September 2, 2012 Mlm ? Middle finger. Kinda freaky middle finger since there are 2 fingers on either side of the bird mIm And if you know any Texas Longhorn fans, you've probably seen their Hook 'em Horns: \m/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CosmicBills Posted September 2, 2012 Share Posted September 2, 2012 Middle finger. Kinda freaky middle finger since there are 2 fingers on either side of the bird mIm And if you know any Texas Longhorn fans, you've probably seen their Hook 'em Horns: \m/ Ooooh! Thanks! I should have worked that one out myself... but it's a weekend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MARCELL DAREUS POWER Posted September 2, 2012 Share Posted September 2, 2012 Don't confuse creation with intervention. The difference between us is you support the interveners who seek to protect the corporations you demonize at the expense of the middle class and I support the removal of the intervention to allow the "little guy" to compete without having to jump over monumental hurdles put in his path by the government for the sake of protecting the politicians' cronies. I don't like it when Republicans do it either, but of late, Democrats are the biggest crony capitalists of them all. do you support lobbying? unlimited funds from corp? or anyone for that matter? is this not bribery, " money as speech" the state would intervene regardless, to protect the nature of lobbying or to remove it. govt is not the problem simpliciter, its the specific ideas put into power or action, are they justified? free enterprise in a corporate framework came about through courts, ie intervention.... this is why i dont understand when people think free markets are not connected to govt intervention to a large degree. its how that specific idea of private property came about, ( ignoring surplus value) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted September 2, 2012 Share Posted September 2, 2012 do you support lobbying? unlimited funds from corp? or anyone for that matter? is this not bribery, " money as speech" the state would intervene regardless, to protect the nature of lobbying or to remove it. govt is not the problem simpliciter, its the specific ideas put into power or action, are they justified? free enterprise in a corporate framework came about through courts, ie intervention.... this is why i dont understand when people think free markets are not connected to govt intervention to a large degree. its how that specific idea of private property came about, ( ignoring surplus value) Now you're just playing the word game. You're equating two completely separate concepts by linking them both to a word that, if applied broadly, could apply to either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PastaJoe Posted September 2, 2012 Share Posted September 2, 2012 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MARCELL DAREUS POWER Posted September 2, 2012 Share Posted September 2, 2012 Now you're just playing the word game. You're equating two completely separate concepts by linking them both to a word that, if applied broadly, could apply to either. its not a word game, corporations in a capitalist system need govt intervention and protection of private property to exist... they defend the expoitation of surplus value and the now legalized bribery which creates more crony capitalism Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted September 2, 2012 Share Posted September 2, 2012 its not a word game, corporations in a capitalist system need govt intervention and protection of private property to exist... they defend the expoitation of surplus value and the now legalized bribery which creates more crony capitalism So you're saying it's impossible to have a government to protect property rights without also having a government that confiscates the wealth of the populace to redistribute it and colludes with those in power to insulate them from competition? That's your theory? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MARCELL DAREUS POWER Posted September 2, 2012 Share Posted September 2, 2012 (edited) So you're saying it's impossible to have a government to protect property rights without also having a government that confiscates the wealth of the populace to redistribute it and colludes with those in power to insulate them from competition? That's your theory? No, im saying its impossible to have any economic social agreement without a govt in place. in a democratic one, those agreements and beliefs of a certain ideology can change. the courts created capitalism , not the market in game theory the prioners dilemma reveals this... the idea of contracts that are not accountable Edited September 2, 2012 by MARCELL DAREUS POWER Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted September 2, 2012 Share Posted September 2, 2012 (edited) MDP is largely correct on economic history. He is, however, very wrong on the genesis of free market exchange; and hideously incorrect about the merits of a socialist system vs. free markets. Edit: and yes, all non-voluntary taxes are theft. Edited September 2, 2012 by TakeYouToTasker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bigfatbillsfan Posted September 3, 2012 Share Posted September 3, 2012 Explain And BTW, Hitler was a socialist. Yes the Nazis were socialist. That's not, however, what made them Nazis. Hitler also went poop I'm sure. I bet you poop, does that make you a Nazi? Coincidence?Not a chance… http://www.washingto...xism-socialism/ http://en.wikipedia....g/wiki/Vorwärts I'm sure part of the reason his campaign chose the slogan was so that they can claim anyone who ties it to Marxism is an extremist right wing nut case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted September 3, 2012 Share Posted September 3, 2012 Yes the Nazis were socialist. That's not, however, what made them Nazis. Hitler also went poop I'm sure. I bet you poop, does that make you a Nazi? I love how Libs always try to disassociate themselves from Hitler when somebody points out that the word Nazi is derived from German slang/shorthand for National Socialism. Well yeah, he kinda thought like us Progressives do but he's different because.... Sure Hitler went poop. Yes, I poop too. You probably poop too. You know who else poops? George W Bush. And George W Bush hates black people. So you have something in common with George W Bush. Does that mean you hate black people too? You frickin Racist® Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted September 3, 2012 Share Posted September 3, 2012 No, im saying its impossible to have any economic social agreement without a govt in place. in a democratic one, those agreements and beliefs of a certain ideology can change. the courts created capitalism , not the market in game theory the prioners dilemma reveals this... the idea of contracts that are not accountable So you're saying we shouldn't abolish the government. Point taken. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted September 3, 2012 Share Posted September 3, 2012 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts