For the love of god or whoever … VOTE!

[Irvrobinson]

But here you are, the one brown nosing all the billionaires you've met as a character witness.

That's pretty funny. Sometimes even fools like you can make me laugh.

You just can't win, can you? You twist around whatever I say or whoever else you don't like says, to goad us into responding to your false accusations. Really pathetic.

 

[Trell]

Nope. Foolish again, Trell.

But yet again you only offer Trump style invectives and insults, and avoids answering serious questions as your support to democracy! Is your repeated refusal to answer just a proof that you are a fascist? Please prove me wrong.

 

[Irvrobinson]

I tend to think there's even MORE closet voters for Trump because of the stigma attached to his behavior.

I agree. Even his evangelical base makes comments about this in the press.

 

[Trell]

That's pretty funny. Sometimes even fools like you can make me laugh.

You just can't win, can you? You twist around whatever I say or whoever else you don't like says, to goad us into responding to your false accusations. Really pathetic.

Here you go: This is how the fascists talk here in EU.

 

[Irvrobinson]

But yet again you only offer Trump style invectives and insults, and avoids answering serious questions as your support to democracy! Is your repeated refusal to answer just a proof that you are a fascist? Please prove me wrong.

This is just nonsense, Trell. Of course I support democracy. Your problem with me is that I support capitalism, and that I don't believe in a victim mentality. The only thing here I'm a victim of is you.

 

[Trell]

I agree. Even his evangelical base makes comments about this in the press.

Ah, you object to the narrative, not the content

 

[Irvrobinson]

Ah, you object to the narrative, not the content

You're more twisted around than a varicose vein, and nowhere near as useful. Do you have any idea how stupid you look? Being a capitalist does not make someone a Trump supporter. Disagreeing with Democratic Socialists does not make someone a Trump supporter either. Get a life.

 

[Trell]

This is just nonsense, Trell. Of course I support democracy. Your problem with me is that I support capitalism, and that I don't believe in a victim mentality. The only thing here I'm a victim of is you.

A red herring, like your usual deflections. I've doubts about your support for democracy from reading your posts. As I've written in many posts this is not about political issues where we can agree to disagree on policy, but on the very structure of democracy where free and fair elections is a central (not the only one, mind you) for it's continuance.

You fail every time.

 

[Irvrobinson]

You fail every time.

You're a legend in your own mind, Trell. Take your meds and go to bed.

 

[Trell]

You're more twisted around than a varicose vein, and nowhere near as useful. Do you have any idea how stupid you look? Being a capitalist does not make someone a Trump supporter. Disagreeing with Democratic Socialists does not make someone a Trump supporter either. Get a life.

You must be in very good shape from hacking all those strawmen of yours

 

[Trell]

You're a legend in your own mind, Trell. Take your meds and go to bed.

Of course you know (no, it's rhetorical) that Soviet Union used to force this on healthy people to quell dissidents.

But here you are, the defender of liberty

 

[Dude#1279435]

I agree. Even his evangelical base makes comments about this in the press.

Well Trump's evangelical base doesn't deserve the time of day.

 

[Irvrobinson]

Well Trump's evangelical base doesn't deserve the time of day.

That's a different issue altogether. My point was that even his most fervent supporters feel they have to explain their support for him, based on his executive actions (such as judicial appointments, etc.) while tolerating his outrageous behavior.

 

[Ponzio]

I don't fear the radical left, I just completely disagree with them. I especially enjoy the view of the CEO of the Whole Foods division of Amazon, John Mackey, who said, "...socialism is trickle-up poverty." I wish I had thought of that. Of course, it's just a derivative of what Margaret Thatcher said in the 1980s, “The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money.”

I’ve always found this alarmist point of view on socialism odd Irv.

How do you explain the economic success of some socialist countries in Europe, Scandinavian countries, Canada, Australia, etc.?

Avarice, no matter the system, be it communism, fascism, socialism, capitalism, etc., always wins out from what I've seen.

I remember reading once where an economist … forget who now … stated that even if you re-distribute all the wealth in the world, you can bet that within 5 to 10 years it would end up in the hands of the top 8% of the population, by hook or crook. It’s just human nature, good or bad.

This reminds of the arguments made in the late 18th century Gilded Age in this country, when a few stated that breaking up the monopolies, courtesy of a fellow Republican Teddy Roosevelt, that communism/socialism would surely descend down on the country and would be the ruination of the USA.

 

[Dude#1279435]

That's a different issue altogether. My point was that even his most fervent supporters feel they have to explain their support for him, based on his executive actions (such as judicial appointments, etc.) while tolerating his outrageous behavior.

I understand that, but I'm talking about ones who project their religion upon him. His spiritual advisor, the televangelists, and his religious base who eat it up. Or the maskless service attendees.

 

[Dude#1279435]

I’ve always found this alarmist point of view on socialism odd Irv.

How do you explain the economic success of some socialist countries in Europe, Scandinavian countries, Canada, Australia, etc.?

Avarice, no matter the system, be it communism, fascism, socialism, capitalism, etc., always wins out from what I've seen.

I remember reading once where an economist … forget who now … stated that even if you re-distribute all the wealth in the world, you can bet that within 5 to 10 years it would end up in the hands of the top 8% of the population, by hook or crook. It’s just human nature, good or bad.

This reminds of the arguments made in the late 18th century Gilded Age in this country, when a few stated that breaking up the monopolies, courtesy of a fellow Republican Teddy Roosevelt, that communism/socialism would surely descend down on the country and would be the ruination of the USA.

I think its because those countries became more capitalist.

 

[Ponzio]

OK, I think it's time for this.

 

[Irvrobinson]

I’ve always found this alarmist point of view on socialism odd Irv.

How do you explain the economic success of some socialist countries in Europe, Scandinavian countries, Canada, Australia, etc.?

Avarice, no matter the system, be it communism, fascism, socialism, capitalism, etc., always wins out from what I've seen.

I remember reading once where an economist … forget who now … stated that even if you re-distribute all the wealth in the world, you can bet that within 5 to 10 years it would end up in the hands of the top 8% of the population, by hook or crook. It’s just human nature, good or bad.

This reminds of the arguments made in the late 18th century Gilded Age in this country, when a few stated that breaking up the monopolies, courtesy of a fellow Republican Teddy Roosevelt, that communism/socialism would surely descend down on the country and would be the ruination of the USA.

I've only been alarmist once that I remember, and it wasn't about socialism per se, it was specifically about US democratic socialism. It was when I thought that Bernie Sanders might become the Democratic presidential candidate, and I would actually be forced to vote for Trump. That was an alarming thought. The rest of the time I've just been in disagreement, however vocal.

I fully admit, I am a strong advocate of capitalism and a market economy, albeit with appropriate "guard rails" for protecting the environment, equality, fiduciary responsibility, product safety, and some other factors for defending the public good. I am also an advocate of financial meritocracy, and I think that system works famously. (Don't confuse support of meritocracy with our inane tax system that values wages less than other income. I did that rant before.) Nonetheless, I think there are things that can be well done by governments, though I'd rather not distract this post with those right now.

The economic success of some countries you mention are not, IMO, the result of their socialistic policies, they are usually the result of their capitalist policies, or other factors, like mineral wealth. Canada and Australia have become more capitalistic over time, and both are especially proud of their recent high technology achievements, mostly done by start-ups. The world's only production quantum computer, for example, is designed and built in Vancouver. Sweden is home to important telecom and engineering companies. Norway is more socialistic, but it has a multi-trillion dollar sovereign wealth fund from oil. Isn't it odd that France and Italy are both so well known for luxury products made by corporations aimed at the rich, when both of those countries seem to despise rich people, and have previously tried to nearly tax them out of existence? But here's a better question... why is Europe still quite secondary to the US, when it has more people by far? And all of these countries get to benefit financially from the US security umbrella? Their children are arguably better educated. They have more equitable health care. They live longer (in general). It is an interesting question.

Regarding monopolies... they used to be different. They actually did dominate necessities. Is Google a monopoly like that? Nope. Not even close. I use Bing all the time because I own more Microsoft stock than Google stock, and it works just fine. So does Yahoo. Is Amazon a monopoly? No way. Walmart? Not nearly. These are just companies that have become extremely rich, and a bunch of politicians think that they have power they don't. How many here really care about Facebook? Not me. Intel? How the mighty have fallen. Do these companies occasionally do some things that reduce competition or raise prices? Yeah, but it's not like Standard Oil was way back when. I think our politicians are just looking for something to do except actually govern and improve our lives.

I like getting richer from other peoples' genius. That's why I like capitalism.

 

[Dude#1279435]

Had it been Bernie and not Biden that would've been a serious problem. I think it's why his own attacked him. He was way too far to the left. Or I hope Joe is a moderate anyway.

 

[lovinthehd]

I've never seen someone who isn't a US citizen or at least a resident so obsessed with US politics.

Yet he thinks more clearly about this than many citizen republicans do.