DVSentinel
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2011
- Messages
- 5,647
- Reaction score
- 1,579
- Location
- The Republic of Texas.
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Other
Non-sense.
Name a single company that exists without customers?
Non-sense.
Name a single company that exists without customers?
No customer owns anything in the company.
I need a car so I guess I can just go down to any company jump in my car and drive off huh?
Hearing this from a DemSocialist so puts me at ease! Thanks, Comrade, for your reassurance!Read more @: Herman Cain says U.S. headed ‘towards socialism and towards communism’
Supposedly somehow in fantasy land amongst the right we are turning into a "socialist" country, then apparently we are going to become a stateless, classless society... This people are ****ing insane. :screwy
No customer owns anything in the company.
I need a car so I guess I can just go down to any company jump in my car and drive off huh?
:lamo
1.)We are not a classless society nor even going anyhwhere near that all one needs to look at is the vast inequalities of wealth
2.)We are not stateless society becasue we have a state and its not "dwindling away"
3.)Do i really need to go into any more dpeth?
I would say a more accurate term would be public investment in not so much ownership of.
The management/owners/etc only own it when they have customers willing to buy their products. No customers, no company to own, no company to work for.
So, I'm taking a rest break from working on the lawn mower atm, it's hot outside, and I get a bit of entertainment from this.
Define ownership.
How so?:2wave:
1.)He did not say we ARE a socialist country, he said we are heading for it.
No. Its not about equality. Its about what all modern civilized countries have to do no matter left right or center. No matter what there is always going to be a form of "redistribution" of wealth.2.)The policy of the US govt is to redistribute wealth to achieve social equality
:doh3.)The policy of the US is to centrally control the economy including direct ownership and monopoly of several industries
:lol: I see what you did there.4.)Do I really need to make it any more sipmle?
The management/owners/etc only own it when they have customers willing to buy their products. No customers, no company to own, no company to work for.
I don't remember the exact quote, but
"If you have the power to destroy it, you control it"
If you control it, you own it.
Whether your names on the title/deed/etc. The customers have the power to destroy any company, therefore they control it and therefore they own it.
I don't remember the exact quote, but
"If you have the power to destroy it, you control it"
If you control it, you own it.
Whether your names on the title/deed/etc. The customers have the power to destroy any company, therefore they control it and therefore they own it.
How so?
Because a centrist democrat is president? Because he bailed out big corporations, left insurance to private providers, passed tax cuts, and is now putting medicare and mediciaid and other social wefare institutions up on the chopping block? That doesnt sount like heading for socialism at all.
No. Its not about equality. Its about what all modern civilized countries have to do no matter left right or center. No matter what there is always going to be a form of "redistribution" of wealth.
:doh
They leave that up to the private corporations. Corporatism my friend is what we are heading for a corporatist oligachy.
:lol: I see what you did there.
:shock: False on the face of it. Corporations do not wield political power, and can not under the current system of law. :naughty Power is wielded by elected representative, and the people can directly influence them.
Read more @: Herman Cain says U.S. headed ‘towards socialism and towards communism’
Supposedly somehow in fantasy land amongst the right we are turning into a "socialist" country, then apparently we are going to become a stateless, classless society... This people are ****ing insane. :screwy[/FONT][/COLOR]
We are turning socialistic, there for, socialist. Communist however, I don't think he was using Marx's definition of Communism, but was referring to the totalitarian socialist states like the Soviet Union, China, NK, Cuba, etc. So, he may be inaccurate by using the term "communism", however he is totally accurate on socialism and totalitarian socialism. Not to see that is "****ing insane".
:shock: False on the face of it. Corporations do not wield political power, and can not under the current system of law. :naughty Power is wielded by elected representative, and the people can directly influence them.
:shock: False on the face of it. Corporations do not wield political power, and can not under the current system of law. :naughty Power is wielded by elected representative, and the people can directly influence them.
:roll:
Really we wanna play that game? Corporations dont wield political power? Ever heard of a lobbyist? Super PAC? Dont be so naive.
money is considered speech and that's one thing corporations arent short on so they can certainly influence politicians
to say otherwise is naive
Wow, I think you have your head in text books; understand the theory but have no clue how things actually work. Either that or you just disingenuous.
Between Citizens United, unbridled lobbyists, gerrymandering, the solid red and blue states, and primary systems which favor extremist candidates the idea the individual citizens "yielding" power is pretty much a myth. I dare say our current system is one of the least democratic in the first world.
All of which can be changed by voters at any point. The system we have is the one chosen by voters.