U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [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)
 
Old 11-21-2018, 05:35 AM
 
21,707 posts, read 10,899,027 times
Reputation: 8879

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve McDonald View Post
Those of the OPs ilk are continually trying to imply that their liberal opponents are promoting and practicing some sort of socialist/communist policy or ideology. This is not true at all. Compassion for others and a willingness to share essentials, with those who are in need, is not at all of that type of social or economic system. But making that false connection, makes a handy means for the rightists, for insulting and disparaging those who don't embrace their policies of greed and lack of concern for their fellow humans.
If I could, I would stop this mandatory “sharing” with deadbeats. Hunger is a great motivator to get a job.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-21-2018, 05:48 AM
 
Location: Texas
24,183 posts, read 10,237,004 times
Reputation: 5406
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve McDonald View Post
There have been several major recessions in our country's history, such as the one in 2008 and the Great Depression, that you may have chosen to ignore.
lol Neither crash happened because of the free market. It's called free money or easy lending and has been a cause of most of our bad economic times.
When you lower standards, quality and efficiency suffer. That's basic economics and it's silly for you to not know that and discuss economics.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve McDonald View Post
The one in 2008 was due in large part, to improperly regulated home loans.
No it wasn't, it was the opposite. Government regulated the industry and forced in lower standards.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve McDonald View Post
The financial industry demonstrated that free-market forces were not adequate to keep them honest and our country was devastated.
Except it wasn't a free market. Why don't you explain to everyone here how the mortgage industry never failed as a whole until government coerced lenders to lower standards. Explain how in 1989 1 in 230 loans was 3% down or less and in 2007 it was 1 in 3. Do you even understand why the little to no down payment loans were avoided? Can you anwer that simple quetion?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve McDonald View Post
Without the policies and effective oversight by Obama and his administration, we might not have recovered.
Obama, like you, is horrible at economics. You don't even know what the free market is much less what caused the crash so why listen to you?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve McDonald View Post
The comeback he orchestrated was so substantial, that almost two years of Trump's malfeasance has not yet managed to bring our economy down again.
Sky high rates of welfare isn't a recovery.
Explain to everyone here why foodstamp usage was 50% higher when Obama left office in 2016 compared to 2007? Population increased 8%. 27 million vs 41 million on food stamps. Explain how that is a recovery.

Last edited by Loveshiscountry; 11-21-2018 at 05:58 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-21-2018, 05:49 AM
 
136 posts, read 67,759 times
Reputation: 196
While we're on the subject, the dinosaurs also went extinct because they tried socialism lol.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-21-2018, 05:50 AM
 
Location: Texas
24,183 posts, read 10,237,004 times
Reputation: 5406
Quote:
Originally Posted by burdell View Post
And giving each household a parcel of land as Bradford did is in accordance with so-called 'natural law?

Imagine that!

So, will that be the GOP's new platform?
lol It wasn't his land to give.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-21-2018, 06:01 AM
 
63,152 posts, read 28,344,706 times
Reputation: 8011
Quote:
Originally Posted by Finn_Jarber View Post
If you look at it that way, you'll have to ask how the indians had survived hundreds / thousands of years under 'socialism'.
Those "socialists" routinely attacked and killed each other over hunting grounds and other issues.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-21-2018, 06:46 AM
 
1,558 posts, read 429,765 times
Reputation: 887
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roboteer View Post
When the Pilgrims first landed in America, their governor William Bradford writes that they set up an economic system very similar to socialism, where everything they produced went into a common pools, and each person was allowed to take only what he needed to survive. Inevitably, some produced little, and even stole from others to get enough to eat. Other complained that they were being required to produce for the ones that didn't and their families. The result was that little was produced, and many starved.

After a few years of that, Gov. Bradford abolished their socialistic system. He gave each family their own land, and each was allowed to keep whatever they produced. And starvation quickly stopped, with far more produced that in past years.

Today we still have a number of people who are ignorant of the results of their desired socialistic systems, and who are determined to force all of us to repeat them.

---------------------------------------------------

https://mises.org/library/great-thanksgiving-hoax-1

Bradford wrote about the first system they used: "...all profits & benefits that are got by trade, traffic, trucking, working, fishing, or any other means" were to be placed in the common stock of the colony, and that, "all such persons as are of this colony, are to have their meat, drink, apparel, and all provisions out of the common stock." A person was to put into the common stock all he could, and take only what he needed.

Bradford writes that "young men that were most able and fit for labor and service" complained about being forced to "spend their time and strength to work for other men's wives and children." Also, "the strong, or man of parts, had no more in division of victuals and clothes, than he that was weak." So the young and strong refused to work and the total amount of food produced was never adequate.

To rectify this situation, in 1623 Bradford abolished socialism. He gave each household a parcel of land and told them they could keep what they produced, or trade it away as they saw fit. In other words, he replaced socialism with a free market, and that was the end of the famines.
just uncommon sense.......
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-21-2018, 07:32 AM
 
Location: Great Britain
9,198 posts, read 3,116,909 times
Reputation: 5484
Most countries have mixed economies and welfare and heathcare coverage for those who need it in society.

Although this has more to do with compassionate capitalism that socialism, and it should be noted that a very different feudel system used to operate in many countries back in middle ages when the wealthy land owners used Serfs who were the lowest social class of the feudal society. In most serfdoms, serfs were legally part of the land, and if the land was sold, they were sold with it. Serfdom is the forced labour of serfs, on the fields of the land owners, and many were forced in to serfdom by hunger and debt. Serfs were basically the property of the Lord or Landowner and were his property, and were classed as peasants.

Serfdom - Wikipedia

Obviously the Pilgrims didn't want a system of serfdom, and prefered a model based on collectivism rather than exploitation based on class or other criteria. Rather ironically the land in the US was indeed given to the people in the US, who introduced slavery based on race in some parts of the US.

Also until recent centuries only the wealthy and land owners had the right to vote, the masses were denied the vote.

This system led to revolts and uprisings, as people were explited by the wealthy elite.

Ring any bells in relation to the extremes of capitalism today.

Whilst I am no socialist supporter, I do believe in, mixed economies, the rich paying their share of taxes, wealthy companies paying taxes instead of using tax avoidance strategies, and I also believe in help for those that need it in society as part of a more compassionate capitalist system as opposed to socialism.

Last edited by Brave New World; 11-21-2018 at 07:57 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-21-2018, 08:52 AM
 
63,152 posts, read 28,344,706 times
Reputation: 8011
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brave New World View Post
Most countries have mixed economies and welfare and heathcare coverage for those who need it in society.

Although this has more to do with compassionate capitalism that socialism, and it should be noted that a very different feudel system used to operate in many countries back in middle ages when the wealthy land owners used Serfs who were the lowest social class of the feudal society. In most serfdoms, serfs were legally part of the land, and if the land was sold, they were sold with it. Serfdom is the forced labour of serfs, on the fields of the land owners, and many were forced in to serfdom by hunger and debt. Serfs were basically the property of the Lord or Landowner and were his property, and were classed as peasants.

Serfdom - Wikipedia

Obviously the Pilgrims didn't want a system of serfdom, and prefered a model based on collectivism rather than exploitation based on class or other criteria. Rather ironically the land in the US was indeed given to the people in the US, who introduced slavery based on race in some parts of the US.

Also until recent centuries only the wealthy and land owners had the right to vote, the masses were denied the vote.

This system led to revolts and uprisings, as people were explited by the wealthy elite.

Ring any bells in relation to the extremes of capitalism today.

Whilst I am no socialist supporter, I do believe in, mixed economies, the rich paying their share of taxes, wealthy companies paying taxes instead of using tax avoidance strategies, and I also believe in help for those that need it in society as part of a more compassionate capitalist system as opposed to socialism.
"the rich paying their share of taxes"... Define that, specifically.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-21-2018, 09:25 AM
 
3,989 posts, read 1,659,946 times
Reputation: 2703
Quote:
Originally Posted by Loveshiscountry View Post
lol Neither crash happened because of the free market. It's called free money or easy lending and has been a cause of most of our bad economic times.
When you lower standards, quality and efficiency suffer. That's basic economics and it's silly for you to not know that and discuss economics.

No it wasn't, it was the opposite. Government regulated the industry and forced in lower standards.
The crash in 2008 happened because of lack regulations. You call it 'easy money' and it was easy money b/c there were no governmental controls to keep the banks from loaning this easy money. But, I think you are getting greed and regulation mixed up.

Obama signed into law the Dodd–Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act in 2010 as a result of the financial crisis. Look it up. The current POTUS is cutting back this reform to the detriment of the country. This is just skimming the surface. You'd have to go back to the Bush administration and look up the regulations that administration rolled back.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-21-2018, 09:38 AM
 
38,220 posts, read 19,266,974 times
Reputation: 12176
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve McDonald View Post
Those of the OPs ilk are continually trying to imply that their liberal opponents are promoting and practicing some sort of socialist/communist policy or ideology. This is not true at all. Compassion for others and a willingness to share essentials, with those who are in need, is not at all of that type of social or economic system. But making that false connection, makes a handy means for the rightists, for insulting and disparaging those who don't embrace their policies of greed and lack of concern for their fellow humans.
Liberal compassion ---> It's easy to have compassion when someone else is paying for it.
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

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
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

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