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.
Not really. There are actual facts supporting the concept that socialism and communism kills... killed more than 100 million to be precise:
Quote:
"Collecting data on democide was an horrendous task. I soon was overwhelmed by the unbelievable repetitiveness of regime after regime, ruler after ruler, murdering people under their control or rule by shooting, burial alive, burning, hanging, knifing, starvation, flaying, beating, torture, and so on and on. Year after year. Not hundreds, not thousands, not tens of thousands of these people, but millions and millions. Almost 170,000,000 of them, and this is only what appears a reasonable middle estimate. The awful toll may even reach above 300,000,000, the equivalent in dead of a nuclear war stretched out over decades.
I found that so much of this killing was unknown or ignored by so many that I decided to publish part of the data and case studies of the worst of the megamurderers as separate volumes. Thus I wrote Lethal Politics on the Soviet Union, China's Bloody Century on Nationalist and communist China, and Democide on Nazi Germany.[7] In Death by Government I focused case studies on the lesser megamurderers, such as the Cambodian Khmer Rouge, the Pakistan military in what is now Bangladesh, Japan's military fascists in World War II, and Turkey's Young Turks in World War I. However, space was not available in that book to also present all the estimates, sources, and calculations that underlie the case studies and their democide totals.
That is in part the purpose of this book. Here I do two things. First I list all the relevant estimates, sources, and calculations for each of the case studies in Death by Government, and all additional cases of lesser democide for which I have collected data. This is a total tabulation, with the result that some of the tables are over fifty pages long. The value of this is the listing of each source, its estimate, and comments qualifying the estimate. From these others can check and evaluate my totals, refine and correct them, and build on this comprehensive set of data. These data are presented and annotated in chapter 2 for pre-20th century democide, in Part 1 for the megamurderers, and in Part 3 for the United States and lesser murderers"
Originally Posted by steven_h Socialism, Marxism, Communism, ALL FAILS
...of course the PSS ignores true history while brainwashing the minions of children with their social engineering.
The US is on the last legs of protecting the Constitution. Sure, GWB and Obama took an oath to protect it and promptly began demolishing it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by petch751
Think about it. We are hearing that Obamacare is in trouble because insurance companies are losing big money because the young didn't sign up for insurance, it was too expensive. When it came time to pay money out of their own pockets they opted for the fine instead. All talk, no action. An example these kids they don't even know what socialism is.
They want socialism until the money comes out of their pockets.
The irony here is that ACA was written by the very insurance company executives and industry experts who now want out because their captive audience (the "law") isn't producing the windfall they expected.
ACA was never about lowering insurance costs to consumers, but more about money, force, and control. The only thing ACA has done is expand Medicaid (which was already a boondoggle) supplemented with fines and higher premiums through exchanges.
This could have been accomplished far easier than ACA with its now 20,000 pages of regulations (control and force)
We've not seen anything yet. The full force of ACA will kick in after Obama is gone, which was also planned. That's how socialism works.
(bolded)
Exactly right, the problem is that every other generation believes their version of it will somehow work. Mostly out of ignorance because they didn't live through world wars, cold wars, a divided Berlin... etc.
Hitler and Stalin were actually best buds for a couple years. The US actually feared THEY would become the world domination allies, but instead Hitler won maniacal flip case contest they were having and then tried to eat his own; also typical of socialist/communist regimes.
As I say every single time this thought comes up, right wingers never bring up the Scandinavian countries when talking about the failures of socialism - - you know, countries that always rank higher than us in livability and are heavily influenced by socialism.
As I say every single time this thought comes up, right wingers never bring up the Scandinavian countries when talking about the failures of socialism - - you know, countries that always rank higher than us in livability and are heavily influenced by socialism.
Because they are not socialist countries as you and the left misguidedly believe. They are free-market capitalism with large welfare budgets paid for by higher income (not corporate) taxes. It's called the Nordic Model, and you and the left should brush up on the facts.
Even the PM of Sweden came out and said "we are not a socialist country!"
Democratic socialism purports to combine majority rule with state control of the means of production. However, the Scandinavian countries are not good examples of democratic socialism in action because they aren’t socialist.
In the Scandinavian countries, like all other developed nations, the means of production are primarily owned by private individuals, not the community or the government, and resources are allocated to their respective uses by the market, not government or community planning.
Don't forget that socialism also causes depopulation.
Socialism fails when it runs out of "other people's money" and it also fails when it runs out of "other people's children."
Before glorious socialism, the standard method of old age security (for the non-rich) was to have a large number of children to support you.
Ah, along comes socialism, and leads you to rely on government instead of your own children. Why not ? It's "other people's children" who will be paying the taxes for your benefit. So you can forgo the cost and nuisance of a large brood.
But that caused birthrates to plummet.
Especially in poor socialist countries, which belies the notion that prosperity reduces birthrates.
In short, Socialism = slavery -and- genocide.
And Europe is trying to remedy its baby gap by embracing emigrants.
LOL - that won't end well.
Aren't all other western Democracies socialist by your definition? They're alive and well. Of course totalitarian governments always suck but you can't pin everything on so called socialism. How about do what works and is right and not worry about the label you hang on it. I know the GOP killed of pragmatism a long time ago but maybe it's time to resurrect it.
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.
