U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 02-26-2009, 09:48 PM
 
Location: Marietta, GA
7,846 posts, read 14,853,765 times
Reputation: 3504

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by lamexican View Post
I know you didn't but you didn't get macks point. Macks point was that the definition being used to call Obama is a socialist can be just as fairly used to call the republicans fascist. So if you want to use the definitions fairly then lets do so. The socialist (dems) against the fascist ( republicans).
No... because Obama is supporting and putting forth policies with a socialist bent. You can't say the Republicans are putting forth facist policies. Well, I guess you could say that but it wouldn't have any basis in fact.

Have you read the so-called stimulus law and the budget that the administration submitted today? Are you paying attention? I'm not making this stuff up, you can actually read it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-26-2009, 10:07 PM
 
Location: New York, New York
4,861 posts, read 6,065,770 times
Reputation: 1019
Quote:
Originally Posted by neil0311 View Post
No... because Obama is supporting and putting forth policies with a socialist bent. You can't say the Republicans are putting forth facist policies. Well, I guess you could say that but it wouldn't have any basis in fact.

Have you read the so-called stimulus law and the budget that the administration submitted today? Are you paying attention? I'm not making this stuff up, you can actually read it.
Its just as valid.
Quote:
Fascists sees the struggle of nation and race as fundamental in society, in opposition to communism's perception of class struggle[62] and in opposition to capitalism's focus on the value of productivity, materialism, and individualism.
Fascism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-26-2009, 10:12 PM
 
Location: Earth
17,447 posts, read 23,879,683 times
Reputation: 7264
Obama is opposed to the Fairness Doctrine and would veto it if Congress decided to reinstate it, which itself is unlikely.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-26-2009, 10:31 PM
 
15,062 posts, read 19,628,583 times
Reputation: 12219
Quote:
Originally Posted by mackinac81 View Post
Pure, true socialism would require the overthrow of capitalism. The two cannot fully exist side by side.
I'll give you one to do some research on:
Capitalism cannot exist without socialism.

To put it in few words, without socialism (Freebies for the poor), at some point the lower class will get tired of living like crap and seeing the upper class living large and they overthrow them.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-26-2009, 10:42 PM
 
Location: Earth
17,447 posts, read 23,879,683 times
Reputation: 7264
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dopo View Post
I'll give you one to do some research on:
Capitalism cannot exist without socialism.

To put it in few words, without socialism (Freebies for the poor), at some point the lower class will get tired of living like crap and seeing the upper class living large and they overthrow them.
Also, to hard-core libertarians the US has been socialist ever since Woodrow Wilson....
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-26-2009, 10:47 PM
 
27,903 posts, read 34,356,310 times
Reputation: 4031
Democratic socialist.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-26-2009, 11:38 PM
 
Location: Santa Monica
4,708 posts, read 7,704,541 times
Reputation: 1029
Quote:
Originally Posted by neil0311 View Post
What I said was that so-called progressive taxation is unfair and approaches being socialist, although not quite.

That's too bad because it shows that you're not informed about the part of the field of economics that relates to how to run a nation's economy. Let the economists make the economics policy.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-27-2009, 01:22 AM
 
Location: DFW Texas
3,096 posts, read 6,762,446 times
Reputation: 2141
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dopo View Post
I'll bust your bubble on this one,
the government owns and controls the public airwaves.

You know what would happen if they didn't,
Anybody could start their own radio station and it would be complete chaos on the airwaves.

In college, we even made a radio transmitter and were told to make sure that it didn't go farther than X distance because we would be braking the law.
I think maybe he is referring to the actual content or format of radio and tv stations?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-27-2009, 04:25 AM
 
Location: San Diego
2,311 posts, read 2,512,930 times
Reputation: 882
Quote:
Originally Posted by g-vegas View Post
Obama lovers say that he is not a Socialist, and that his policies have nothing to do with Socialism; than what is Socialism. Here are Obamas plans for his four year term, you decide:

1. Wants the privately owned banks to be federally funded and managed.

2. Wants all private citizens to make the same income and live the same lifestyle.

3. Wants increased caps on how much private and public businesses can make.

4. Wants increase funding for welfare and other entitlements.

5. Wants the government to run and manage the radio waves and television airwaves (Fairness doctrine) First Ammendment

6. Wants an end to private gun ownership Second Ammendment

7. Wants to limit the states rights Tenth Amendment

These are just a few of the many socialist ideals that "The Messiah" wants to inact. Yes fellow Americans Change is here.
Without reading any responses so sorry if this is repetitive.

1. The fed is not a constitutionally mandated branch of govt, get on the Reagan administration for pretending they are.

2. And chupacabera will bite you in your sleep

3. The lochness monster will eat your babies

4. We need tax havens for rich people (but I'm not rich so I wouldn't know what they need anyways)

5. I believe everything right wing radio commentators say

6. Unless colored folk move into my neighborhood. They should be able to own any of my constitutionally protected firearms. Especially muslims. I should be able to buy an assault rifle all while believing that a muslim who wants to buy a 22 in my neighborhood probably wants to kill my grandkids.

7. Unless the state wants to limit gun ownership, who can get married, who can smoke pot, who can get a hooker, etc etc
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-27-2009, 05:20 AM
 
Location: St. Joseph Area
6,237 posts, read 8,448,149 times
Reputation: 3101
Quote:
Originally posted by neil0311
Maybe not, but what would you call it? Of course I guess in truly and openly socialist countries, the government just takes everything, so there is no charade or premise that things are fair.
That's right, and the only true socialist countries are the communist ones. Think USSR "Union of Soviet Socialist Republics"
To your first question, I'd simply call it "taxation". Obviously you don't want income taxes too high (The tax rates Reagan began with were waaaaaay too high). But societies do need revenue in order to function. There are roads to keep up, schools to build etc.. . And if Obama said "I'm raising taxes to 50%+, It'd strongly disagree; but the top rate is only going back up to where it was under Clinton. (39%) And seeing how the country did in the nineties, I'm not too worried.

Also, consider this Adam Smith quote--it makes some sense:

Quote:
“The necessaries of life occasion the great expense of the poor. They find it difficult to get food, and the greater part of their little revenue is spent in getting it. The luxuries and vanities of life occasion the principal expense of the rich, and a magnificent house embellishes and sets off to the best advantage all the other luxuries and vanities which they possess. A tax upon house-rents, therefore, would in general fall heaviest upon the rich; and in this sort of inequality there would not, perhaps, be anything very unreasonable. It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion”
--Adam Smith, “The Wealth of Nations”


For the record, I'm not on the far left. I'm more centre than centre left. But if the government needs revenue for the vital government functions, why would we take the bulk of it from people who have to spend more on necessities than those who don't? (ie, the poor and middle class). It's not a class envy thing. I don't hate the rich (especially if they worked hard to get there) But progressive taxation simply makes economic sense.

I'm not defending what the government spends it's money on (There's SO MUCH waste), but I don't disagree with the idea of progressive taxation.

Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:48 AM.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top