Actually, he's standing behind you right now. Whatever you do, don't cluck.
Americans favor Sanders over Trump
- Thread starter KingOrfeo
- Start date
Actually, he's standing behind you right now. Whatever you do, don't cluck.
Obtuse, thy name is richard_daily.
Remember Blockbuster? For some reason (no such thing as VHS tapes, then no such thing as DVDs), Blockbuster didn't exist in the 1960s. When VHS tapes became popular, Blockbuster and any number of other outlets sprang up to rent and sell VHS tapes.
Started to figure it out yet or do you need another example?
OK, I'll take it for granted you have figured it out.
Vouchers do not magically appear overnight. They have to be approved by the Legislature and signed into law by the governor. Then the Democrats will challenge the law in court.
This process takes at least a year and probably two, and then the state has to get the voucher process in place.
In the meantime, any number of entrepreneurs will be planning for the day Johnny, who can't read even though he's in fourth grade, will be available for instruction. Those entrepreneurs want the voucher money burning a hole in Johnny's mommy's pocket, and by God Johnny better be able to read by the time he gets to fifth grade or mommy will be taking her business elsewhere.
R_d, get back to me if you still don't understand.
BotanyBoy
Fuck Your Safe Space
- Joined
- Jun 28, 2012
- Posts
- 52,256
Citizens United imo is when that was solidified and finalized.
It really put special interest groups in direct charge.....bad idea.
No, but I do disagree that he's the closest to a non-politician.
I think he and a few others genuinely care, and really want to do what's right for the country and not just their campaign financiers. I might think he's misguided in a lot of his politics, but I think he's genuine.
You might not like their brand of politics but I think both the Paul's really do care about the USA as well.
There are more but they are all in the same boat.....totally ostracized by the parties and labeled 'unelectable' and 'radical' in their views by the media. Some are just so Jr. they just haven't had time to be bought out yet but I never judge until I see them doing it.
I have high hopes for Gabbard. She looks good so far....hopefully she keeps her integrity about her, buuuuuut only time will tell.
http://www.trainsandtravel.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/gabbard.jpeg
At this point I'm game for either.....capitalism or socialism...but god damn we have got to pick one and pull the trigger. The crybabies at that point can deal or GTFO but it's gotta happen because the current set up is simply not working and will NOT be lasting much longer, it's fuckin doomed.
Last edited:
He's been serving in elected offices for decades, he's a politician. What distinguishes him is that he's a good politician -- not in the sense of "successful" or "effectual", but in the sense of "honest, goodhearted and sincerely dedicated."
I agree, but I have deep doubts as to their honesty and goodheartedness. I think they're more like Communists -- their cause is so important that truth and moral decency can fairly be sacrificed to it. That is often the way with ideologues, Sanders, to the extent he is one, thankfully being an exception.
Last edited:
BotanyBoy
Fuck Your Safe Space
- Joined
- Jun 28, 2012
- Posts
- 52,256
The polar opposite of communist sure.
The difference being their ideology doesn't require truth or moral decency to be sacrificed, the communist does.
about_average
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Feb 19, 2011
- Posts
- 11,430
If you have a need to try to insult my wife because you have no argument then there's no need to reply to you anymore.
about_average
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Feb 19, 2011
- Posts
- 11,430
Except the USSR was socialist in name only. Much like Nazi Germany.
4est_4est_Gump
Run Forrest! RUN!
- Joined
- Sep 19, 2011
- Posts
- 89,007
about_average
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Feb 19, 2011
- Posts
- 11,430
If there had been a Sanders/Gabbard ticket in 2016 I think it would have been one of the biggest landslides in history. Not a Trump "landslide", but a actual landslide.
Then Gabbard in 2020.
I suspect the Pauls -- and many other libertarians -- of being willing to make those sacrifices anyway.
BotanyBoy
Fuck Your Safe Space
- Joined
- Jun 28, 2012
- Posts
- 52,256
Both were extremely socialist.....under every definition of the word.
One communist the other nationalist, both very much socialist with extremely tight government control over production, distribution and the exchange of goods and services .
What definition of socialism are you using?
If there had been a Sanders/Gabbard ticket in 2016 I think it would have been one of the biggest landslides in history. Not a Trump "landslide", but a actual landslide.
Then Gabbard in 2020.
Yes but that would pose a far bigger threat to the DNC than Trump who will make them look good and give them a bunch of ammo to put another Obama/Clinton in office.
So I wouldn't hold my breath, (D)'s will subvert that ticket and their voting base will let them do it without anything more than a "Hey that's not fair!" just before they vote for another Clinton/Sachs ticket.
Maybe, maybe not....point is they don't want the government to go force march everyone down the same road to hell they are on.
Socialist have no problem doing so.
Even when it means forcing millions into starvation and cannibalism.
Last edited:
Not, I hope, the stupid and indefensible one you always use that seems to encompass any form of taxation or economic regulation.
BotanyBoy
Fuck Your Safe Space
- Joined
- Jun 28, 2012
- Posts
- 52,256
Is government control and force over the individual and their economic activity not socialism on the micro scale?
What do you call it when the government prescribes, micromanages and limits your economic opportunities?
Sure as fuck ain't capitalism or liberalism.
No.
What do you call it when the government prescribes, micromanages and limits your economic opportunities?
Regulation.
Sure as fuck ain't capitalism or liberalism.
Regulated capitalism is still capitalism.
BotanyBoy
Fuck Your Safe Space
- Joined
- Jun 28, 2012
- Posts
- 52,256
so·cial·ism
ˈsōSHəˌlizəm/Submit
noun
a political and economic theory of social organization that advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.
According to the definition of socialism that's exactly what the fuck it is.
No, it's not.
cap·i·tal·ism
ˈkapədlˌizəm/
noun
an economic and political system in which a country's trade and industry are controlled by private owners for profit, rather than by the state.
Being a well kept slave does not make one free.
It's a continuum, not a dichotomy. Completely unregulated capitalism has never existed in any environment with effectual government. That does not mean capitalism has never existed.
BotanyBoy
Fuck Your Safe Space
- Joined
- Jun 28, 2012
- Posts
- 52,256
Only on a macro scale.
On the micro it's a dichotomy in the sense they can be next to each other but they can't occupy the same space.
That doesn't make government intervention anything except the social control over others economic activity.......socialism.
Didn't say it hasn't.
I'm saying government control over economic activity is socialism. Right, wrong, good, bad, micro, macro....that is all irrelevant to the fact that government control over the means of production and distribution of goods and services is socialism.
Private control over the means of production and distribution of goods and services is capitalism.
Last edited:
The two are inseparable; any regulation will have some effect on the production sector.
Similar threads
