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.
Socialism -> a way of organizing a society in which major industries are owned and controlled by the government rather than by individual people and companies.
Think Obamacare
Think also of all the rhetoric coming from the Left regarding income distribution, income equality, "social justice." All those terms are right out of Marxist/socialist philosophy.
The problem with the Left is that they have bought into Obama and all his lies and rhetoric, and they are not willing to let it go and believe there is another agenda at work. They are willfully ignorant. And they refuse to educate themselves.
It does, and that's only the beginning. Obama has already been in the business of picking winners and losers in industry, has he not?
So has the US government from the beginning of time. That's how technology develops, that's how cotton is still relevant, that's how railroads developed. Obama wasn't the first to "pick winners and losers" and he wont be the last.
So has the US government from the beginning of time. That's how technology develops, that's how cotton is still relevant, that's how railroads developed. Obama wasn't the first to "pick winners and losers" and he wont be the last.
That isn't how technology develops. Only in very few cases has the government had anything to do with technological achievement (NASA).
Fairchild was one of the primary developers of integrated circuits, and when I read the history of Fairchild about a year ago, I saw no mention of any government "handouts" to that company. It was all private investors that grew that company. Intel "spun off" of Fairchild. The founder of Intel had been a Fairchild engineer. This was a very tight community (still is).
Of course we have Apple, also with no help from the government mad many advancements in computers. I'm sure their are hundreds more that never depended on government to develop technologies and grow.
Invoke Rush as an attempt to discredit the poster. Fail! You people use every opportunity to invoke the name of Rush. It doesn't discredit Rush, or the poster.
Quote:
Originally Posted by theunbrainwashed
Which direction is Obama pushing the country? So far, I see nothing going on that is indicative of socialism as defined by international politics, as opposed to the Fox News definition.
What is the "Fox News definition?" I have never heard it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by theunbrainwashed
Then Obamacare doesn't fall under socialism. Try again, petch. You just contradicted yourself
Obamacare is very definitely socialism. It is government control of the health insurance industry and also of health care itself, as it has a whole host of regulations that apply to doctors and hospitals.
That isn't how technology develops. Only in very few cases has the government had anything to do with technological achievement (NASA).
Fairchild was one of the primary developers of integrated circuits, and when I read the history of Fairchild about a year ago, I saw no mention of any government "handouts" to that company. It was all private investors that grew that company. Intel "spun off" of Fairchild. The founder of Intel had been a Fairchild engineer. This was a very tight community (still is).
Of course we have Apple, also with no help from the government mad many advancements in computers. I'm sure their are hundreds more that never depended on government to develop technologies and grow.
I didn't say the government itself advances technology (though it has in several cases), but that they support companies that do, as well as various industries. Look at railroad expansion, airlines, protections of cotton and keeping other products cheaper than foreign ones. By your definition that's picking winners and losers. Hell, every time the military picks a Boeing design over Airbus they are picking a winner.
I didn't say the government itself advances technology (though it has in several cases), but that they support companies that do, as well as various industries.
Here we go again. Now the leftist fanatic is using the "If government didn't do it, nobody would do it" fib.
Obamacare is very definitely socialism. It is government control of the health insurance industry and also of health care itself, as it has a whole host of regulations that apply to doctors and hospitals.
So is all insurance socialist? It is taking money from one person in the form of a premium and giving it to somebody else as a claim.
If you are a productive member of society obamacare is detrimental to your finances insured or not insured. If you are a government and taxpayer leach it is good.
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.
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.
