Posts: 10,987
Threads: 59
Reputation:
43407
Joined: May 2015
Mood: None
(11-12-2020, 02:29 PM)fredtoast Wrote: This vaccine proves there is no systemic racism in the United States? 
Nope.
Quote:And I am still waiting for the anti-socialists crowd to call for the end of free public education. I am guessing some of the people who helped develop this vaccine went to public schools.
I've never been anti-socialism, in moderation. If you doubt this then find a post in which I've stated otherwise. In fact I've frequently pointed out that all the Western democracies are a mix of capitalism and socialism. We just happen to be the one skewed the most towards capitalism.
In any event, my post was about the screaming fools granted so much credibility of late who actively deride capitalism and demand the end of it. If you're not one of those people then feel free not to be offended.
Posts: 40,628
Threads: 1,062
Joined: May 2015
Mood: None
(11-12-2020, 02:34 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: I don't believe it is is inherently exploitative, that is just a fact. It only works because people are not compensated for the full value of their work. If they were, there would be no profit.
Plus the evils of unregulated capitalism are not based on theory. We have history as proof of the results.
Posts: 16,084
Threads: 412
Reputation:
59424
Joined: May 2015
Location: Shenandoah Valley
Mood:
(11-12-2020, 02:34 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Please define "large faction".
Exactly what percentage of the population are you claiming want to completely do away with capitalism and go to a pure socialist economy where the government owns and controls all the means of production? And what is your source for your opinion.
From what I see almost everyone wants to keep a capitalist economy with expanded social programs. But the rigth-wing media refers to a capitalist economy with expanded social programs as "socialism" just to scare the rubes.
Pretty much. That's where I am on things as a social democrat. I just like to make people uncomfortable by bringing up Marxist stuff because it's fun.
"A great democracy has got to be progressive, or it will soon cease to be either great or a democracy..." - TR
"The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little." - FDR
Posts: 10,987
Threads: 59
Reputation:
43407
Joined: May 2015
Mood: None
(11-12-2020, 02:34 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Please define "large faction".
Exactly what percentage of the population are you claiming want to completely do away with capitalism and go to a pure socialist economy where the government owns and controls all the means of production? And what is your source for your opinion.
I have no idea as to the exact number. I just know the idea is gaining traction in the Democratic party and rising stars such as AOC have labeled it as "irredeemable". I assume she will thus be refusing the vaccine when it is available.
https://www.newsweek.com/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-says-capitalism-irredeemable-1357720
Quote:From what I see almost everyone wants to keep a capitalist economy with expanded social programs. But the rigth-wing media refers to a capitalist economy with expanded social programs as "socialism" just to scare the rubes.
You'll have to tell the leaders of your own party that so they can get their members on message then.
Posts: 10,987
Threads: 59
Reputation:
43407
Joined: May 2015
Mood: None
(11-12-2020, 02:34 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: I don't believe it is is inherently exploitative, that is just a fact. It only works because people are not compensated for the full value of their work. If they were, there would be no profit.
Without profit there is no incentive. I can't sell something for exactly what it costs to make it otherwise I can't eat. I totally agree that some companies, such as Amazon and Walmart, pay obscenely low wages while reaping huge profits. I'm a firm believer in the Henry Ford model.
Posts: 16,084
Threads: 412
Reputation:
59424
Joined: May 2015
Location: Shenandoah Valley
Mood:
(11-12-2020, 02:42 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Without profit there is no incentive. I can't sell something for exactly what it costs to make it otherwise I can't eat. I totally agree that some companies, such as Amazon and Walmart, pay obscenely low wages while reaping huge profits. I'm a firm believer in the Henry Ford model.
That is why I say the system is inherently exploitative. I'm not denying what you say here, I am just pointing out that the system does not function without that exploitation, and you're confirming it.
"A great democracy has got to be progressive, or it will soon cease to be either great or a democracy..." - TR
"The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little." - FDR
Posts: 40,628
Threads: 1,062
Joined: May 2015
Mood: None
(11-12-2020, 02:40 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: I have no idea as to the exact number. I just know the idea is gaining traction in the Democratic party and rising stars such as AOC have labeled it as "irredeemable". I assume she will thus be refusing the vaccine when it is available.
Now I understand why you sound so confused
"One person" = "large faction"
[quote pid='947394' dateline='1605202826']
You'll have to tell the leaders of your own party that so they can get their members on message then.
[/quote]
Actually you will have to pull your head out of the right-wing echo chamber because not one single leader of the Democratic Party is calling for pure socialism where the government owns and controls the means of production.
Posts: 10,987
Threads: 59
Reputation:
43407
Joined: May 2015
Mood: None
(11-12-2020, 02:44 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: That is why I say the system is inherently exploitative. I'm not denying what you say here, I am just pointing out that the system does not function without that exploitation, and you're confirming it.
Eh, I get that, but exploitation is inherently negative. I don't think being paid a fair wage for your labor is exploitative.
Posts: 38,493
Threads: 1,699
Reputation:
55425
Joined: May 2015
Location: SW PA
Mood:
(11-12-2020, 02:42 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Without profit there is no incentive. I can't sell something for exactly what it costs to make it otherwise I can't eat. I totally agree that some companies, such as Amazon and Walmart, pay obscenely low wages while reaping huge profits. I'm a firm believer in the Henry Ford model.
I think most people that would labeled "anti-capitalist" simply think what you just said: There's a need for profit...but not at the expense of the workers. Greed is an incurable disease. Doesn't matter which end of the production line it comes from: owner or worker.
That's why unions helped workers.
That's why owners wanted rid of unions.
We see where we are now because of that.
![[Image: giphy.gif]](https://media0.giphy.com/media/1kwsTjL8BNqlszNtnCE/giphy.gif)
Warning: Reading signatures may hurt your feelings.
Posts: 16,084
Threads: 412
Reputation:
59424
Joined: May 2015
Location: Shenandoah Valley
Mood:
(11-12-2020, 02:48 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Eh, I get that, but exploitation is inherently negative. I don't think being paid a fair wage for your labor is exploitative.
Is it a fair wage, though? That's the philosophical question. The market value for your labor is what it sells for on the market, but in order for there to be a profit you have to be paid less than that market value. So is that a fair wage?
Anyway, I'll stop dragging this thread off the rails. This is just my main point. And don't confuse me with someone that thinks socialism isn't also exploitative, because the "from each according to their means/ability and to each according to their needs" means that there is an exploitative element there, as well.
"A great democracy has got to be progressive, or it will soon cease to be either great or a democracy..." - TR
"The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little." - FDR
Posts: 10,987
Threads: 59
Reputation:
43407
Joined: May 2015
Mood: None
(11-12-2020, 02:47 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Now I understand why you sound so confused
"One person" = "large faction"
Yeah, it's one person, Fred. No matter how bad my day is you can always bring a smile to my face.
Quote:Actually you will have to pull your head out of the right-wing echo chamber because not one single leader of the Democratic Party is calling for pure socialism where the government owns and controls the means of production.
Except the original draft of the "Green New Deal" that got walked back with a quickness. Didn't Bernie Sanders endorse that? Isn't Bernie a major player on that side of the aisle? Quit burying your head in the sand, your party will soon be unrecognizable if you don't.
Posts: 10,987
Threads: 59
Reputation:
43407
Joined: May 2015
Mood: None
(11-12-2020, 02:49 PM)GMDino Wrote: I think most people that would labeled "anti-capitalist" simply think what you just said: There's a need for profit...but not at the expense of the workers. Greed is an incurable disease. Doesn't matter which end of the production line it comes from: owner or worker.
I wish I could agree with you, but I no longer think that's the case.
Quote:That's why unions helped workers.
That's why owners wanted rid of unions.
We see where we are now because of that.
I've always been a supporter of unions. Interestingly, some on the far left want to ban public sector unions. If I'm recalling incorrectly I apologize, but didn't you call for an end to public sector unions?
Posts: 10,987
Threads: 59
Reputation:
43407
Joined: May 2015
Mood: None
(11-12-2020, 02:52 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Is it a fair wage, though? That's the philosophical question. The market value for your labor is what it sells for on the market, but in order for there to be a profit you have to be paid less than that market value. So is that a fair wage?
Anyway, I'll stop dragging this thread off the rails. This is just my main point. And don't confuse me with someone that thinks socialism isn't also exploitative, because the "from each according to their means/ability and to each according to their needs" means that there is an exploitative element there, as well.
Socialism is also exploitative as it creates a people dependent on the government to even exist. There's no end to the power you can exert over such a populace. But yes, I agree, let's let the thread return to it's original topic.
Posts: 40,628
Threads: 1,062
Joined: May 2015
Mood: None
(11-12-2020, 02:53 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Yeah, it's one person, Fred. No matter how bad my day is you can always bring a smile to my face.
Yes, AOC is just one person. I asked you for a number and you gave me one person.
(11-12-2020, 02:53 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Except the original draft of the "Green New Deal" that got walked back with a quickness.
Thank you for proving my point. The Green New Deal did not eliminate capitalism. But it still got "walked back quickly" because the majority of Democrats felt it was too extreme.
But the only thing people who live in the right wing echo chamber heard was "The Green New Deal ends capitalism and replaces it with government ownership of the means of production."
Posts: 10,987
Threads: 59
Reputation:
43407
Joined: May 2015
Mood: None
(11-12-2020, 03:52 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Yes, AOC is just one person. I asked you for a number and you gave me one person.
Yes, Fred, it's just one person. 
Quote:Thank you for proving my point. The Green New Deal did not eliminate capitalism. But it still got "walked back quickly" because the majority of Democrats felt it was too extreme.
It was co-authored and sponsored by Bernie Sanders, as I said. Oops, looks like that's more than one person now. The majority of Democrats thought it would cost them votes, and that's about the only definitive thing you can say about it.
Quote:But the only thing people who live in the right wing echo chamber heard was "The Green New Deal ends capitalism and replaces it with government ownership of the means of production."
Well, it did as initially offered. Keep banging that "right wing echo chamber" drum though, I'm sure it makes you feel intellectually superior.
Posts: 40,628
Threads: 1,062
Joined: May 2015
Mood: None
(11-12-2020, 05:11 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Well, it did as initially offered.
I might be wrong.
Got a link?
Posts: 40,628
Threads: 1,062
Joined: May 2015
Mood: None
(11-12-2020, 05:11 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Yes, Fred, it's just one person.
It was co-authored and sponsored by Bernie Sanders, as I said. Oops, looks like that's more than one person now.
I don't understand the meaning of the smirk.
You think you sound intelligent defining a "large faction" as two people?
Posts: 10,987
Threads: 59
Reputation:
43407
Joined: May 2015
Mood: None
(11-12-2020, 08:15 PM)fredtoast Wrote: I don't understand the meaning of the smirk.
You think you sound intelligent defining a "large faction" as two people?
Yes
Posts: 5,171
Threads: 62
Reputation:
23301
Joined: May 2015
Mood: None
(11-12-2020, 08:15 PM)fredtoast Wrote: I don't understand the meaning of the smirk.
You think you sound intelligent defining a "large faction" as two people?
Oh my, he obviously means that these two people have a significant followership that share their ideals. Which makes sense, for if that weren't so no one would know what an AOC is.
Not that I think you actually weren't grasping this. But this strain of debate is getting particularly unentertaining. Smirk.
Posts: 10,987
Threads: 59
Reputation:
43407
Joined: May 2015
Mood: None
(11-12-2020, 08:21 PM)hollodero Wrote: Oh my, he obviously means that these two people have a significant followership that share their ideals. Which makes sense, for if that weren't so no one would know what an AOC is.
Not that I think you actually weren't grasping this. But this strain of debate is getting particularly unentertaining. Smirk.
Thank you. Fred needs a third party to point these things out most of the time. Not to bring you into the "feud" but this is precisely correct.
|
![[Image: 4CV0TeR.png]](https://i.imgur.com/4CV0TeR.png)
