• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

43% in Iowa identify themselves as socialist !

Sampson Simpson said:
Of course, because its what trolls like james does, post stupid, dishonest garbage,
Click to expand...

if true please present the best example of this for whole world to see.Thanks
 
Kobie said:
2. The idea that "Democrats are socialists" is painfully wrong.
.
Click to expand...
Bernie leads the Party. Bernie is an open socialist. 1+1=2
 
Kobie said:
3. "Socialism" has never starved a single person in human history. Ideas don't starve people.
.
Click to expand...

so socialism never starved 60 million to death in China, and capitalism never eliminated 40% of all the poverty on earth the instant China switched to it?
It was the Girl Scoutism.
 
Kobie said:
. Ideas don't starve people.
.
Click to expand...


Terrorists Don't Kill People… Ideas Do - Sean Edwards
This page does not exist!
Nov 25, 2015 ... Unfortunately, barbarity and terrorism are as old as mankind. For all of recorded history, people have used violence and fear to control others. But in the last 200- 300 years, the western world evolved beyond most of that. We've rejected violence in every situation but self-defense. And for decades, the ..
 
Chomsky said:
Because it would be hypocritical.
Click to expand...

why is taking your fair share hypocritical?. If paying for SS was voluntary and she paid that would be hypocritical. Do you understand?
 
James972 said:
why is taking your fair share hypocritical?. If paying for SS was voluntary and she paid that would be hypocritical. Do you understand?
Click to expand...
She's a hypocrite of the worst type, James. Deal with it.
 
Chomsky said:
She's a hypocrite of the worst type, James. Deal with it.
Click to expand...

I already explained to you that it would be so only if payment into SS was voluntary and she paid while claiming she was against SS. Now do you understand?
 
James972 said:
I already explained to you that it would be so only if payment into SS was voluntary and she paid while claiming she was against SS. Now do you understand?
Click to expand...
No. I do not understand your logic here at all. Nor do I agree.
 
Chomsky said:
No. I do not understand your logic here at all. Nor do I agree.
Click to expand...

you must be able to say where the logic fails and why you don't agree.
 
Chomsky said:
No. I do not understand your logic here at all. Nor do I agree.
Click to expand...
He seems not to understand that the underlying point isn't that Rand used SS, its that she needed it in the end, after years of saying it was just a program for "looters".

When she needed help, she didn't get it from all the rich elites she praised, she got from a social safety net.
 
MovingPictures said:
He seems not to understand that the underlying point isn't that Rand used SS, its that she needed it in the end, after years of saying it was just a program for "looters".

When she needed help, she didn't get it from all the rich elites she praised, she got from a social safety net.
Click to expand...

1) she died with a substantial estate
2) she would have had millions more without getting ripped off for SS
3) modern libertarians don't mind imposing a personal safety net they just don't like a govt imposed one
 
James972 said:
yes, 43% of Democrats self-identify as socialist communist. They obviously lack the IQ to understand capitalism
Click to expand...

did you know that only two percent of anonymous people who use the word "socialism" on message boards can define the term correctly?

:lol:
 
Helix said:
did you know that only two percent of anonymous people who use the word "socialism" on message boards can define the term correctly?

:lol:
Click to expand...

do you want to help us then and define it correctly?
 
James972 said:
do you want to help us then and define it correctly?
Click to expand...

sure.

Socialism is a range of economic and social systems characterised by social ownership and democratic control of the means of production, as well as the political theories and movements associated with them.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism
Click to expand...

i definitely don't own the means of production where i work, and neither do most other workers. we live in a system of regulated capitalism. one side wants to regulate it less, and the other more.
 
Helix said:
sure.



i definitely don't own the means of production where i work, and neither do most other workers. we live in a system of regulated capitalism. one side wants to regulate it less, and the other more.
Click to expand...


sounds innocent enough until you recall that socialism slowly starved 120 million to death. Apparently ideas have consequences.
 
James972 said:
Bernie leads the Party. Bernie is an open socialist. 1+1=2
Click to expand...

A. Bernie has not actually been any kind of socialist since he joined Congress, no matter how much he insists that he is.
He was, for all practical purposes, disowned by the actual Democratic Socialists of America, his party, when he announced.
Bernie seems to have made a capital mistake by claiming to be a democratic socialist when in reality he's been an FDR New Deal liberal Democrat for the last 30 years.

B. Sometimes old ex-hippie baby boomers get jobs in management at Wall Street brokerages. They wear the three piece suit, they do Wall Street work all day but they keep a tiny tuft of long hair in back tucked under their collar. Then when they get home, they take off their suits and unfurl their wispy little locks, thinking they're "letting their freak flag fly" while listening to their Trans-Siberian Orchestra cassettes.
That's Bernie with regard to his "democratic socialism". He still has a romantic attachment but by virtue of all the legislation he has worked on, he's a simple New Deal Dem, nothing more.

I'm not writing this for the benefit of BOT972 because the BOT972 cannot make up its mind if Bernie is an open Communist, or a socialist, or if all Democrats are automatically socialists, or communists, or if all liberals in general are socialists, or communists, or if anything liberal is automatically communism.
A=A=A=A=A=A as far as the BOT972 is concerned.

I'm writing it to clear the air on Bernie, who by the way, has never actually JOINED the Democratic Party.
He's the most popular among most liberals, including quite a few Democrats, but he's NOT a Democrat, and the Democratic Party proved he wasn't, by shutting him out, by legal AND possibly illegal means.
My position, Bernie SHOULD have JOINED Democratic Party long ago.
I'm sure that the BOT972's position is that doing so (joining the Dems) proves he's "an open Communist" because, as we've already heard from BOT972, Democrats are Communists.
 
James972 said:
does the liberal have even one example of this hypocrisy
Click to expand...

Many.
I could post them all, but your response will either be "radio silence", like LAST NIGHT when I beat you silly, or you'll just say "100% absurd and liberal", because that's your SCRIPT, and you're unable to deal with facts, or logic.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom