Remembering TCPaul, 2016-2019

Sweden is Not a Socialist Success

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0lx D-gikpMs This is thoug theimmigrant01/04/19
Social safety net to get back on your feet yes. Degenerate d demwave01/07/19
This. I’ll add social safety net for the disabled and r dingbat01/08/19
Who's to say who is retarded? Do we lump in all Trump suppor theimmigrant01/08/19
The flaw in socialism is because it can tend to separate tal jeffm01/09/19
socialism works on a small scale but not on a large scale. dingbat01/09/19
You might be right. Never considered it like that. jeffm01/09/19
You only separate “money makers” from their “tools” midlaw01/09/19
We were talking about socialism. jeffm01/09/19
It's easier to call the proposal socialism rather than discu superttthero01/09/19
I love it when conservatives say dont tax the rich, and dont bangbus01/09/19
theimmigrant (Jan 4, 2019 - 8:00 pm)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0lxD-gikpMs

This is thought provoking, although it goes without saying that I am, in general, nary a fan of Stossel, whom I find disingenuous, insipid, and reactionary. Having said that, the more that one researches the realities of socialism, the more he is inclined to err on the side of Fiscal Conservatism. I am still Left of Center Fiscally though imo because there is a need for a strong social safety net in a free and democratic society such as what ours was until Autumn of 2016. Anyway, I digress. What do you all think of this Video? Discuss.

—TI

Reply
demwave (Jan 7, 2019 - 1:44 pm)

Social safety net to get back on your feet yes. Degenerate dependent way of life NO!

Reply
dingbat (Jan 8, 2019 - 3:06 pm)

This.

I’ll add social safety net for the disabled and retarded (also, why abortions and sex Ed are a must)

Reply
theimmigrant (Jan 8, 2019 - 8:16 pm)

Who's to say who is retarded? Do we lump in all Trump supporters? Would make sense imo, since a plurality are seemingly on some form of public assistance, yet somehow persist in voting against they're interest's.

Reply
jeffm (Jan 9, 2019 - 8:22 am)

The flaw in socialism is because it can tend to separate talent from the means of production. Making money, like any activity, is a talent. Some people are more compelled to compete for it than others. Some are better at it than others.

Like anyone with a talent, moneymakers need their tools of trade. Just like Federer needs a tennis racket, Buffet needs his railroads, etc.

If you take away the tools of these talented individuals, you stifle their competitiveness. As citizens/voters, many of us seem to think that we know best how to handle the economy. Of course, it's ludicrous to think I know how to run Exxon or BNSF RR Co.

IMO, you have to let the talented people continue to do their thing. You don't go taking their stuff away, thinking you can do it better. Instead, you tax them.

I don't go taking away Federer's tennis racket under some misguided idea that people will come pay top dollar to see me play against Nadal. The best way is to let Federer keep his racket and to require him to pay taxes.

There are exceptions to the rule, such as the military and police/fire protection.

Reply
dingbat (Jan 9, 2019 - 8:57 am)

socialism works on a small scale but not on a large scale.

On a small scale, you know everyone, so you know and trust whose got talent, and you’re willing to sacrifice for your close acquaintances

On a large scale, you don’t trust some stranger you never met, and you’re certainly not gonna sacrifice your own wellbeing for some dumb schlum

Reply
jeffm (Jan 9, 2019 - 10:19 am)

You might be right. Never considered it like that.

Reply
midlaw (Jan 9, 2019 - 11:56 am)

You only separate “money makers” from their “tools” if you don’t have private ownership. All of the Nordic countries have private property. So does China ffs.

Reply
jeffm (Jan 9, 2019 - 7:36 pm)

We were talking about socialism.

Reply
superttthero (Jan 9, 2019 - 9:13 am)

It's easier to call the proposal socialism rather than discuss the correct amount of taxation.

I am not necessarily in favor of giving wage-earners a higher tax burden, but would welcome a proposal where total income (from all sources) at the highest levels is taxed to the point of disentivizing further acquisition of wealth.

Reply
bangbus (Jan 9, 2019 - 11:39 am)

I love it when conservatives say dont tax the rich, and dont worry about wealth acumulation because they are making money and the economy and everybody is better off. Government stay out of this, dont intervene for a resditributive purpose.

The rising tide lifts all boats.

But then...Enter CHYNA!!

GOVERNMENT HAALP US!

China has accumulated too much wealth and controls the means of production, we cant compete in the market or make any money just like those lazy blacks we despise! But we're not lazy...its chinas fault we cant compete.

Government help!!! We need you to intervene so this global wealth can be reallocated more fairly...back to us. Can you tax china plz?

Our domestic production and services needs some affirmative action in the market place

Reply
Post a message in this thread