(04-05-2019 06:56 AM)TigerBlue4Ever Wrote:  

(04-05-2019 05:52 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(04-04-2019 11:12 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  

(04-04-2019 08:12 PM)usmbacker Wrote:  As the far left candidates for the Democrats spout more of their Communist platforms, look for more and more Dems to switch to Trump. Even more will say they would never vote for Trump, but when the reality of choosing a far left nutcase is upon them, they will vote for Trump in the privacy of the voting booth.

There is a difference between a Democratic elected Socialists than a communists.
A Democratic Socialists believe that everybody have the same access to a home, education, cars, health care and the like that makes everybody as equals. In a Communist country? Citizens do not have any rights. The wealth goes to the Dictator leaders and their cronies. At birth, you are told what you be doing. They will forced you to be a figure skater instead of a football player. They make sure you cheat to win gold medals at the olympics and all that. All Religion is banned in those countries. If you do not fall into an athlete? You are denied health care, cars and homes. You live in run down shacks. Many of the EU countries are Socialist elected democratic countries.

"Democratic socialist" is kind of a made up term. The proper European term is "social democrats," and yes, there are significant differences between social democrats on the one hand, and communists, socialists, and fascists on the other. Social democrats believe in providing a safety net underneath what is basically a free market, capitalist economy. Socialists, communists, and fascists all believe in centrally controlled economies, they just have different ways of getting there. Socialists believe in government control of the means of production. Communists believe in massive redistribution of income and wealth, "from each according to his ability, to each according to is needs." Fascists believe in nominal private ownership, but in order to operate, you have to do what government tells you to do.
And right now, the democrats are coming down on the communist side of that divide. They don't want to help the poor. They want to keep them dumb, poor, dependent on handouts, and therefore reliable democrat voters. They just want to make the "rich" the boogeymen and therefore justify stealing from them in order to promote and support their own particular interests. Democrats are really little different from a banana republic.
I actually support a lot of social democrat concepts. I support universal health care, following the Bismarck universal private care/insurance model, and I believe in a universal basic income, following Milton Friedman's negative income tax or the Boortz-Linder prebate/prefund. And I support paying for it with a "regressive" consumption tax and also broadening (fewer deductions), flattening (less "progressive"), and lowering income tax rates. That's how social democrats do it,

Are the Scandinavian countries such as Norway and Sweden considered social democracies?

Yes. And some things about them would be surprising to many Americans. For example, much is made of Sweden's top individual income tax rate of 60%. But that's not a "progressive" redistribution tax, it's a high tax for everybody. They start at 35% for everybody, hit 55% at about US$50,000, and 60% at about US$75,000. Plus, they get about 20-30% of total government revenues from a "regressive" consumption tax. And their corporate tax is 22%, with was about half ours until 2017, and is still less than ours when state taxes are considered. And they have privatized social security and no-fault medical malpractice.

Norway's taxes are lower, because they have the North Sea oil royalties. Denmark's and Finland's taxes are roughly comparable to Sweden. But all of them are simply high-tax jurisdictions, not confiscatory redistribution schemes. And everybody benefits. Most of the social benefits are not means-tested but available to all.

It's a completely different philosophy from ours. The obvious drawback is that at those tax rates it is extremely difficult to move up the economic ladder, so economic mobility is constrained. But you can still get there, it just takes longer.

(04-05-2019 06:26 AM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(04-05-2019 05:52 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(04-04-2019 11:12 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  

(04-04-2019 08:12 PM)usmbacker Wrote:  As the far left candidates for the Democrats spout more of their Communist platforms, look for more and more Dems to switch to Trump. Even more will say they would never vote for Trump, but when the reality of choosing a far left nutcase is upon them, they will vote for Trump in the privacy of the voting booth.

There is a difference between a Democratic elected Socialists than a communists.
A Democratic Socialists believe that everybody have the same access to a home, education, cars, health care and the like that makes everybody as equals. In a Communist country? Citizens do not have any rights. The wealth goes to the Dictator leaders and their cronies. At birth, you are told what you be doing. They will forced you to be a figure skater instead of a football player. They make sure you cheat to win gold medals at the olympics and all that. All Religion is banned in those countries. If you do not fall into an athlete? You are denied health care, cars and homes. You live in run down shacks. Many of the EU countries are Socialist elected democratic countries.

"Democratic socialist" is kind of a made up term. The proper European term is "social democrats," and yes, there are significant differences between social democrats on the one hand, and communists, socialists, and fascists on the other. Social democrats believe in providing a safety net underneath what is basically a free market, capitalist economy. Socialists, communists, and fascists all believe in centrally controlled economies, they just have different ways of getting there. Socialists believe in government control of the means of production. Communists believe in massive redistribution of income and wealth, "from each according to his ability, to each according to is needs." Fascists believe in nominal private ownership, but in order to operate, you have to do what government tells you to do.

And right now, the democrats are coming down on the communist side of that divide. They don't want to help the poor. They want to keep them dumb, poor, dependent on handouts, and therefore reliable democrat voters. They just want to make the "rich" the boogeymen and therefore justify stealing from them in order to promote and support their own particular interests. Democrats are really little different from a banana republic.

I actually support a lot of social democrat concepts. I support universal health care, following the Bismarck universal private care/insurance model, and I believe in a universal basic income, following Milton Friedman's negative income tax or the Boortz-Linder prebate/prefund. And I support paying for it with a "regressive" consumption tax and also broadening (fewer deductions), flattening (less "progressive"), and lowering income tax rates. That's how social democrats do it,

I don't! it's a horseshite system any way you cut it that will only drive up cost to the consumer one way or the other....

socialized healthcare is going to doom our economy once you old fk'rs die off....

just like the oil companies gouged after Katrina, the insurance force is making that look like tiddly-winks....

that ol' supply and demand will whip an arse when it can take advantage...,

Where is the incentive to do... well, almost anything. Wall-E is going to be lauded as a precautionary tale full of prescience by the time we are done on this little rock.



Or, inversely. we will all end up dying of starvation because no one does anything. The example of the Puritans is germane.

William Bradford wrote:

"The experience that was had in this common course and condition, tried sundry years and that amongst godly and sober men, may well evince the vanity of that conceit of Plato’s and other ancients applauded by some of later times; that the taking away of property and bringing in community into a commonwealth would make them happy and flourishing; as if they were wiser than God.

“For this community was found to breed much confusion and discontent and retard much employment that would have been to their benefit and comfort. For the young men, that were most able and fit for labor and service, did repine that they should spend their time and strength to work for other men’s wives and children without any recompense. The strong had no more in division of victuals and clothes than he that was weak and not able to do a quarter the other could; this was thought injustice. The aged and graver men to be ranked and equalized in labors everything else, thought it some indignity and disrespect unto them. And for men's wives to be commanded to do service for other men, as dressing their meat, washing their clothes, etc., they deemed it a kind of slavery, neither could many husbands well brook it.”

Fortunately they realized the folly in which they were engaged and from that failed experiment came the underpinnings and foundation for our capitalist free market system.

Even so, this didn't prevent the likes of John Locke, Charles Fourier, etc from establishing socialist utopian enclaves across the country. Brook Farm, New Harmony, Shakers, Amana Colonies, Oneida Community, The Icarians, Bishop Hill Commune, Aurora, Oregon and Bethel, Missouri, all failed experiments in socialism.

BUT, this latest generation of utopia seekers will get it right THIS time by gosh!

(04-05-2019 06:26 AM)stinkfist Wrote:  I don't! it's a horseshite system any way you cut it that will only drive up cost to the consumer one way or the other....
socialized healthcare is going to doom our economy once you old fk'rs die off....
just like the oil companies gouged after Katrina, the insurance force is making that look like tiddly-winks....
that ol' supply and demand will whip an arse when it can take advantage...,

Try to tell a Frenchman that he has socialized health care. But don't plan to do it unless you are willing to get a full ration in return. It's a two-tier system. There is a socialized system for those who went it, and a free-market capitalist system (way more free market than ours) right alongside it for those who want that instead.

We're going to end up with some form of universal health care. The political pressure is just too great. Might as well be the one that actually works.

(04-04-2019 11:08 PM)swagsurfer11 Wrote:  Hillary Clinton. Let that sink in.

"Most qualified candidate in history!" - barry o

(04-04-2019 11:12 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  A Democratic Socialists believe that everybody have the same access to a home, education, cars, health care and the like that makes everybody as equals.

How much soy does one have to ingest before such an ideology becomes appealing? Imagine any self-respecting man rallying in the streets for the government to give him his fair share of a home, education, cars, etc.

:shudders:

Why should the bum outside 7-Eleven or the Starbucks barista have access to the same schit I have worked for or the same income I've negotiated, leveraging my own education, skills, experience, and successes?

Why should I have the access to the same schit Donald Trump or Jeff Bezos have worked for? Why would Donald Trump build towers, casinos and golf courses and why would Jeff Bezos build an online retail business and spend 100 hour weeks mastering their craft and their business instincts making decisions if ultimately I or the Starbucks barista was going to have access to the same home, education, cars, and health care as they have?

That just isn't how it works.

(04-05-2019 01:25 PM)EverRespect Wrote:  Why should the bum outside 7-Eleven or the Starbucks barista have access to the same schit I have worked for or the same income I've negotiated, leveraging my own education, skills, experience, and successes?

Why should I have the access to the same schit Donald Trump or Jeff Bezos have worked for? Why would Donald Trump build towers, casinos and golf courses and why would Jeff Bezos build an online retail business and spend 100 hour weeks mastering their craft and their business instincts making decisions if ultimately I or the Starbucks barista was going to have access to the same home, education, cars, and health care as they have?

That just isn't how it works.

Only in the land of fairies and unicorns.

(04-04-2019 11:12 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  A Democratic Socialists believe that everybody have the same access to a home, education, cars, health care and the like that makes everybody as equals.

I'd say the same rights. The exact same rights. No rights at all.

Those things are not rights. Nobody has a right to any of them. Every one of them requires cost and effort on the part of someone else. You do not have a right to force anyone else to do your bidding, particularly not without adequate compensation. That went out with slavery. Are you arguing to return us to slavery? Or maybe feudalism?

(04-05-2019 07:25 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(04-05-2019 06:26 AM)stinkfist Wrote:  I don't! it's a horseshite system any way you cut it that will only drive up cost to the consumer one way or the other....
socialized healthcare is going to doom our economy once you old fk'rs die off....
just like the oil companies gouged after Katrina, the insurance force is making that look like tiddly-winks....
that ol' supply and demand will whip an arse when it can take advantage...,

Try to tell a Frenchman that he has socialized health care. But don't plan to do it unless you are willing to get a full ration in return. It's a two-tier system. There is a socialized system for those who went it, and a free-market capitalist system (way more free market than ours) right alongside it for those who want that instead.

We're going to end up with some form of universal health care. The political pressure is just too great. Might as well be the one that actually works.

w/o question......there's no turning back once pandora rears its ugly head...

I'm at the point where cost should be controlled by mandated statutes.....and I never thought I would state that in my lifetime....

I told one my employee 10 yrs ago to watch how many drugs will be released to the general population moving forward and how the fda will manipulate how they're introduced....

how many commercials do you see today that target the geriatric sect, eh?

again, this whole thingy is a wealth siphon on the middle class....I see no out in stabilization by any form of health care welfare.....

people need to die and tender to the next gen(s).....but that's not going to happen either, is it....

the longer more one lives, the longer the burden on the USD long term....your gen in absolute numbers is the largest ever....there's no escaping that one....

your gen is hunky.....mine is on the fence (X).....the rest are fk'd in my mind....

(04-04-2019 07:54 PM)swagsurfer11 Wrote:  Not real Dems. His favorables are upside down there.

Do you mean socialists that have corrupted the democrat party pushing flyover country dems out of the party and into GOP camps? "REAL Democrats" = Communists.