Socialism Is the Only Way

darkbeaver

the universe is electric
Jan 26, 2006
41,035
201
63
RR1 Distopia 666 Discordia
We do have all that you mentioned and more and every bit of it is because of a social public ethic not one of those progames is paid for or was instituted by a capitalist or a banker who all fought tooth and nail to make sure that they did not happe, and everyone of those vital programes that majke your life and mine possible is and has been under attack by the private sector for a very long time to your detriment as well as mine. You as a small bussiness man do pay, you pay the rich mans shot as well as your own if you would only look at who pays what and where the money goes you will see that you are indeed getting the ****ty end of the stick. But what you do not seem to understand or will not awknowledge is that fact that the biggest enemy of small bussiness are bigger bussinessess who are and have been successful in offoading the expence of maintenance of those public institutions onto the backs of the next rung down on the bussiness ladder. What social institution has damaged small enterprise any more than Walmart for instance who rotinely decimate the small bussiness of every town they set up shop in and buy all of thier products from slave factorys so that the wage earners in your town cannot spend at your place of bussiness.You blame the wrong elements in society for the expences you incure over and above what you feel are just. Have it your way , if you like but it is that way not because of socialism or social programes, if you want a better deal you better not expect the bankers to provide it or give you a break anywhere down the line, they depend on you for thier fortunes the more you help them the more you'll pay, and that is the simple law of the jungle you seem to love. Nobody destroys small enterprise faster than big enterprise namely capitalism, that's why monopoly was banned long ago, and only recently allowed again. Your paying more than your share because they pay none of thier's. While the rest of the planet on or near nothing I might add, what you favour is simply not sustainable, the partys over for all intents and purposes.
 

jimshort19

Electoral Member
Nov 24, 2007
476
11
18
26
Zurich
DB, "Collective farming Jim is already popular and gaining in popularity..."

What share of the world/s food supply do they produce now?

DB, "
But they are not. Tens of millions died. If I may presume to correct you (and I've presumed worse) DBcorrected, "Those collective farms must have worked because most of the people are still alive."

db, "The only sector of the national economy that stands to loose from the practice are capitalists who can't and won't feed us properly right now and in fact never have."

You hate the national economy. Why feign that you care now? The capitalists are the only farmers we have and the only ones who've fed me all my life. We have the best food in the world. The people are obese.
 

darkbeaver

the universe is electric
Jan 26, 2006
41,035
201
63
RR1 Distopia 666 Discordia
Yes Jim I stand corrected, we are obese, but it's not a healthy obese, why can't we get obese organicly at the local farmers market, we are being deprived by the capitalists of healthy fat.

Hey Jim I got an important question for you, seriously. Chistians believe the fruit of the tree of knowledge is the apple, muslims believe it is the raspberry. What do Jews believe it is? This question is not a joke in case you're suspicious, it is totally on the up and up, honest man.:smile:
 

jimshort19

Electoral Member
Nov 24, 2007
476
11
18
26
Zurich
Dark Beaver, "Chistians believe the fruit of the tree of knowledge is the apple."

Jews have Genesis in the Talmud, wrote the entire Christian bible, and don't believe it any more than I do, in general. But the tree was the oldest explanation of the evolution of the mind of man. Our most special variation.

But because my answer is doubtless more tiresome than yours, I'd have to say it's the Talmud.
 

smdfaru

New Member
iARTthere4iam

You said:

"I would be far more interested in what you (or any other person advocating more socialism) have to say if you would be so kind as to spell out exactly what your brand of socialism means. Exactly.

"Would I be able to engage in enterprise? Buy what I wish, sell what I wish? Could I own my home? Choose my profession and succeed or fail based on my skills and resoucefullness?
"Rather than bash capitalism which has given us unrivaled opportunity in the history of humanity you should spend your time showing us how your vision will make our lives better."
My reply:

My last comment was in response to a person who displayed an awareness of his or her surroundings in society. You do not indicate such but are fixated on your own little space in the whole of society.

Lets say that from 1 to 10, your life's satisfaction level is a 7. Do you expect socialists to show you how to raise it up to say, 9. You get that promise from the politicians during every election campaign. What you are asking is for socialists to beat them at their own game. So, you are living a comfortable life but you won't mind to have a group come forward and juice up your comfort. Very self centered to say the least.

Here is the situation in simple terms. First: Recognize a critical social problem. Second: Investigate all possible solutions to solve the problem Third: This takes a large majority. Agree on the most probable solution and implement it. You haven't got to the first stage yet. As I pointed out, my proposition is only one. Take a look at it; don't like it; come up with something better. Again, that is difficult to do if the majority are holed up in their own personal space always in a defensive mode to safeguard it.

I, for one, before I understood what socialism means, and recognized something was wrong with society, seriously done a study on socialism and every authentic socialist I know did the same thing. The problem is there are thousands of charlatans running amok in society spouting bogus socialism. Four well known people in the past hated authentic socialism with a passion, Stalin, Mao, Hitler and Mussolini (On second thought, Franco can be thrown in with the butcherers). To make sure that socialism never developed the earliest minute stage of a root, they slaughtered millions upon millions of people. The capitalist class breathed a sigh of relief while they were doing that, least the plague would spread to the US.

I suggest you take a long look outside your own little sphere and while you are at it, smell (not the roses) the stink weeds.

Don
 

iARTthere4iam

Electoral Member
Jul 23, 2006
533
3
18
Pointy Rocks
iARTthere4iam

You said:

"I would be far more interested in what you (or any other person advocating more socialism) have to say if you would be so kind as to spell out exactly what your brand of socialism means. Exactly.

"Would I be able to engage in enterprise? Buy what I wish, sell what I wish? Could I own my home? Choose my profession and succeed or fail based on my skills and resoucefullness?
"Rather than bash capitalism which has given us unrivaled opportunity in the history of humanity you should spend your time showing us how your vision will make our lives better."
My reply:

My last comment was in response to a person who displayed an awareness of his or her surroundings in society. You do not indicate such but are fixated on your own little space in the whole of society.

Lets say that from 1 to 10, your life's satisfaction level is a 7. Do you expect socialists to show you how to raise it up to say, 9. You get that promise from the politicians during every election campaign. What you are asking is for socialists to beat them at their own game. So, you are living a comfortable life but you won't mind to have a group come forward and juice up your comfort. Very self centered to say the least.

Here is the situation in simple terms. First: Recognize a critical social problem. Second: Investigate all possible solutions to solve the problem Third: This takes a large majority. Agree on the most probable solution and implement it. You haven't got to the first stage yet. As I pointed out, my proposition is only one. Take a look at it; don't like it; come up with something better. Again, that is difficult to do if the majority are holed up in their own personal space always in a defensive mode to safeguard it.

I, for one, before I understood what socialism means, and recognized something was wrong with society, seriously done a study on socialism and every authentic socialist I know did the same thing. The problem is there are thousands of charlatans running amok in society spouting bogus socialism. Four well known people in the past hated authentic socialism with a passion, Stalin, Mao, Hitler and Mussolini (On second thought, Franco can be thrown in with the butcherers). To make sure that socialism never developed the earliest minute stage of a root, they slaughtered millions upon millions of people. The capitalist class breathed a sigh of relief while they were doing that, least the plague would spread to the US.

I suggest you take a long look outside your own little sphere and while you are at it, smell (not the roses) the stink weeds.

Don

You are incorrectly assuming that i want you (or anybody) to make my life better. If my happiness is a 7 and I would rather it be a 10 then I have some work to do. And I do! It is not for you or anyone to make me happy.

We already live in a country that is very socialist. If someone is advocating more socialism and less capitalism, I want to make sure that what you are advocating is sane, rational and doable. If we are to believe you and be even more socialist I want real answers. As you seem unable or unwilling to share your vision I am very skeptical.

Here is a sample of the questions you should be able to answer.

1) will I be able to own my house
2) will I be able to work hard for what I want in life and run my business for a profit
3) will I be free to choose my profession and change my profession as I see fit.
4) how much will I be required to give up to pay for the social programs (income tax, property tax, sales tax, etc.)
5) what incentives will there be for people to work hard and be enterprising
 

jimshort19

Electoral Member
Nov 24, 2007
476
11
18
26
Zurich
iARTthere4iam, ""... if you would be so kind as to spell out exactly what your brand of socialism means."

Don, "You... are fixated on your own little space in the whole of society. ... Very self centered to say the least...

I, for one...recognized something was wrong with society... thousands of charlatans running amok... Stalin, Mao, Hitler and Mussolini... To make sure that socialism never developed... slaughtered millions upon millions of people. The capitalist class breathed a sigh of relief...

I suggest you take a long look outside your own little sphere...

Don

Now be serious iART. What's the point?
 

paullind10

New Member
Feb 20, 2007
20
0
1
www.healthcarereviews.com
There's no such thing as a 'genuine democracy', there will just be a small group of political elite controlling things. So take your pick, a group of companies with great influence or a group of politicans controlling things. Judging by Vladimir Putins' government in Russia I'll stick with the corporations as much as I dislike them.

Let's stick with our dual public and private system, both can keep each other in check. I'ld personally like to see more private healthcare to help keep the public system honest and reduce the burden on an unsustainable healthcare model. The same goes for the education system, teachers getting 2-3 months vaction a year are obviously incapable of making an objective opinion here, they've lost all concept of financial realities.
--
Admin, HealthcareReviews.com , rate and review your hospital and doctor.
 

jimshort19

Electoral Member
Nov 24, 2007
476
11
18
26
Zurich
Paullin10, "'ld personally like to see more private healthcare to help keep the public system honest and reduce the burden on an unsustainable healthcare model. The same goes for the education system, teachers getting 2-3 months vaction a year are obviously incapable of making an objective opinion here, they've lost all concept of financial realities.

The same goes for the justice system. Three industries, largely unrecognized as industries, dominate public expenditures. All are monopolistic, largely under the control of powerful guilds, deelivering poor service and constantly broken to the point of unsustainability.

There is resistance to recognizing education, justice and healthcare as businesses, as there was and remains in the case of farming. With this recognition comes responsibility, good management, competition, progress, bankrupt companies, profitable companies, sustainability and improved service. This is the payoff of economic freedom. Of course, the primary regulators of free enterprise, social and economic pressure, are inadequate to provide satisfactory service to losers like me. So it's going to cost a lot of money, but if we don't throttle the goose to death, I'll not only be able to see a doctor at my home, but I'll be able to pay for the house call.
 

darkbeaver

the universe is electric
Jan 26, 2006
41,035
201
63
RR1 Distopia 666 Discordia
Freedom does not exist, not as a concept nor in reality. Pure illusion, hence Jims belief that a birds genitalia are the well spring of human good. If delusion like that remains confused with freedom we in reality will find ourselves free only of a planet. free hahahahahahahahah:lol: Freedom is the original conspiracy theory.
 

smdfaru

New Member
iARTthere4iam

What is this bit. We socialists constantly hear that socialists want to control everything and dominate workers lives (workers! that is a quantum leap right there, before anyone can begin to consider socialism, know the class you belong to--to hear most people talk, they sound like something else besides a worker). I am not afraid to admit I am a worker and realize that the vast majority in society are workers and therefore the vast majority in society belong to the working class. That under a capitalist society, (at this point, just for a short time, set aside in your mind, thoughts about personal possessions, home, rolex watch, high definition TV and all that fancy stuff you consume-concentrate on the means of production) sorry, the age old hang up, separating personal property from productive property, while keeping in mind that the situation at the moment is capitalism not socialism. This sounds awkward but that is what I have to deal with--like teaching the a, b, c's to children. Now back to the point, under capitalism, workers own none of the means of production. The only thing that they do own, that is involved in production, is their ability to work. Capitalists, (by the way before going further, this applys to state ownership of the means production systems also), capitalists measure the application of workers ability to perform work in time--called labor time. Working by the clock it is said, although professions who think working by the clock is beneath them, work an imaginary 40 hours a week, but many times, since there no clock to regulate their time, they might work 10, 20 sometimes even 30 hours over 40, pretty sneaky by the capitalist, don't you think. But, since the earlier days, capitalists have gotten smarter dealing with workers beneath the level professionals, converting them into independent contractors, no benefits and working off the clock is unlimited.

Now, it should be clear to you, who owns what. Only one of the ownerships described is for sale, therefor it is a commodity, therefor it is subject to the law of supply and demand, the greater the supply, the lower the price (pay). Guess what? That commodity is the ability to perform work in the process of production. Therefor, the capitalist class control the most important thing concerning the working class, the means to eke out a livelihood for the worker and the family.

Talk about being aware of your surroundings, I don't get my information strictly from the particular socialists publication I read, I get it straight from the capitalist media, and whatever I do get from the socialist publication pertaining to capitalism, also comes straight from the capitalist media. Karl Marx got 99 per cent of his information about capitalism straight from the capitalist media.

Now before this gets into a lecture in which mere comments are not the place for it, I leave off at this point.

One more short point. There is no such thing as a partial socialist society, it is all or none. You might think that the government gives!!! you universal health coverage, but as shown in my, too short to be adissertation, it actually comes from the application of the total labor in the total production of social needs.

Socialists have to deal with all kinds of stumbling blocks while trying to inform about socialism, such as Jimshort19, on this site, who, as useless as you know what on a bore hog, incessantly nips at one heels with ridiculous nonsense and, among many other things, being blocked on the forum from making reference links to sites, which sort of limits comments to prater, that offer more lengthly definitive reading material explaining what socialism is.

Don
 

jimshort19

Electoral Member
Nov 24, 2007
476
11
18
26
Zurich
Don, "...know the class you belong to."

Most Canadians regard their society as fundamentally classless, despite the fact that bank account balances vary widely. Some Canadians know that socialism is materialsm in extremis, and that it breeds poverty not profit. Very few Canadians know that Josef Stalin and Mao were capitalists and the Jews are behind everything. I am counting on a few good men on this forum to show the light to a billion ignoramuses like me. Because in so doing, they will discredit themselves. The average person has enough brains and education to know that the National Socialist Party (Hitler) used the workers' come on to seize power, then proceeded to have their way with the world.

The demagogue's materialist appeal to covetousness and larceny targets those least educated and most poor. This is an effective power cocktail. Once sufficient power has been obtained by a few, only murder can sustain it.
 

darkbeaver

the universe is electric
Jan 26, 2006
41,035
201
63
RR1 Distopia 666 Discordia
Dark Beaver, "Chistians believe the fruit of the tree of knowledge is the apple."

Jews have Genesis in the Talmud, wrote the entire Christian bible, and don't believe it any more than I do, in general. But the tree was the oldest explanation of the evolution of the mind of man. Our most special variation.

But because my answer is doubtless more tiresome than yours, I'd have to say it's the Talmud.

I don't have an answer to my question because I'm to lazy to thumb through the book to find it Jim, I told you up front there was no rick to the damn question man, what's happened to the trust Jim. The Talmud a good interseting answer though, but.

Here I go again. Which of these does not go with the other or on a bagel?
apple---------------------raspberry--------------------Talmud

No tricks Jim I just want to know about fruit, honest, cross my heart and hope to die, on me dear old mudders grave.:smile:
 

darkbeaver

the universe is electric
Jan 26, 2006
41,035
201
63
RR1 Distopia 666 Discordia
Radical reforms in Ecuador: an example for Canada?



I am witnessing, for the first time in my life, a government that has won democratic power with a promise to implement badly needed political and economic reforms actually proceeding to do so.
Rafael Correa​

>by Roger Hollander
January 18, 2008
I heard it back then from my Liberal and even some of my Tory friends: “Ed Broadbent is by far the best candidate. Too bad he’s NDP. Otherwise I’d vote for him.” I am now hearing the same thing about Jack Layton.
Well, let me tell you something. Jack Layton, with his keen intelligence, his transparent honesty, his charismatic and winsome personality, his formidable drive and seemingly endless energy, his love for his country, and – above all – his commitment to social and economic justice; if Jack Layton were Ecuadorian, he’d be the country’s leader today.
Let me explain.
Ecuador, a small country with a population of about 13 million, is a country rich in natural resources: minerals and oil, bananas, fresh flowers, coffee, cocoa, rice, fish and shell fish – the list goes on and on. And yet, nearly three fourths of its people live in poverty and lack basic sanitation, health and educational resources.
It has been ruled by military dictatorships and, since the late 1970s, by democratically elected presidents who rarely are able to complete a term in office. Its Congress is made up of a plethora of political parties, most of which are beholden to entrenched economic interests. It has been commonly asserted and seldom contested that the country is simply ungovernable.
Enter Rafael Correa, a European and U.S. trained Professor of Economics who in 2005 became Finance Minister in a transition government. He had the audacity to stand up to the World Bank by demanding that excess revenues from petroleum be directed towards financing health and education programs rather than toward servicing the external debt. The now discredited ex World Bank President, Paul Wolfowitz, pressured the government to fire Correa, and the Minister became a hero in Ecuador overnight.
A dark-horse candidate with an organization created on the fly, Correa overwhelmed the traditional political parties and won the 2006 presidential election in a landslide. He was 43 years old, the same age as John F. Kennedy when he ascended to the presidency of the United States. Correa has no representation in the Congress, however, which continues to be dominated by three main obstructionist political parties.
Correa’s major campaign promise was to hold a popular referendum that would ask Ecuadorians if they wished to create a Constituent Assembly with plenary powers to restructure Ecuador’s political and economic system. That Referendum was held in April 2007 and the “Yes” vote was an astounding 81.7 percent. Elections for the 130-member Constituent Assembly were held in September of the same year, and Correa’s supporters (Acuerdo País) won 80 seats and another ten to fifteen seats went to progressive parties that are more or less in support of the president’s radical reform agenda. The three major traditional parties (Social Christian, PRIAN and PSP) are a small minority, winning a total of 32 seats between them, and enjoy the additional support of only a handful of delegates from other right leaning parties. How the mighty have fallen!
The Constituent Assembly began meeting in late November, and its first act was to suspend the Congress, a highly popular move.
Just before year’s end it passed its first major piece of legislation, a tax reform bill that addresses blatant omissions and closes enormous loopholes and went into effect on January 1, 2008. Its major elements include (all amounts in US dollars):
  • A progressive inheritance tax, excluding estates of $50 000 or less, and with a ceiling of 35 percent on estates of $600 000 or more; A progressive income tax, excluding annual incomes of $7850 or less (the average annual salary in Ecuador is approximately $2500), with a ceiling of 35 percent;
    A progressive tax on unused acreage (enormous estates owned, and in many cases confiscated, by the country’s traditional elites are sitting fallow);
    An increase in “sin taxes” on cigarettes, liquor, perfume, videogames, sport rifles and ammunition, and incandescent light bulbs.
    An increase in the minimum wage from $170 to $200 monthly, and increase of 17.6 percent.
The vote for these measures at the Constituent Assembly was 90 in favour, 23 against, 6 abstentions, and 11 absent. The 90 “Yes” votes represent 69.2 percent of the Constituent Assembly’s total membership and 79.6 percent of those members present and voting.
It is estimated that the new taxes will generate revenue in excess of $400 million, virtually all of it coming from the pockets of the upper and upper middle classes.
These revenues will go directly into public education, urban infrastructure, public utilities such as water purification and sanitation, economic development, and public transportation.
Needless to say, the country’s economic elite, who since time immemorial have been getting away with murder with respect to taxation, are in a state of apoplexy. Correa has been unrelenting in his criticism of the mainstream media, who have attempted to derail his reform agenda with distortions and outright lies. He is being referred to as a dictator and compared to Adolph Hitler. This in the face of unprecedented popular support as reflected in a series of landslide election victories.
I am witnessing, for the first time in my life, a government that has won democratic power with a promise to implement badly needed political and economic reforms actually proceeding to do so. I see in Ecuador, for the first time since I began my annual extended visits thirteen years ago, a glimmer of hope for genuine change. Where this will lead – once the powerful economic forces behind the opposition to these reforms come together with a unified strategy – no one can predict.
I see Correa as a Kennedy/Trudeau-esque figure, but one who, in the context of Latin American political and economic realities, has no choice but to propose more radical reforms than one would expect in the U.S. or Canada. He has made a pronouncement, for example, that “authorizes” workers to take over businesses and industries that refuse to comply with the new tax structure and minimum wage.
Canadians should take a good look at what is happening in Ecuador. In the past 25 years we have seen our social safety net eroded, the loss of decent paying jobs, an increase in underemployment, social programs cut, employee benefits reduced, urban infrastructure deteriorating, and a shameful and exponential rise in homelessness.
I just hope that Canada doesn’t have to fall to the level of poverty and disintegration that has characterized Ecuador before we find a way to elect a genuine leader – I think you might know who I mean – with the vision and courage to address with conviction and vigour the inequalities and injustices that are anathema to the vast majority of Canadians.
Roger Hollander is a former Toronto Metro Councillor (1987-1995) who has lived much of the past 12 years in Ecuador.


 

darkbeaver

the universe is electric
Jan 26, 2006
41,035
201
63
RR1 Distopia 666 Discordia
Britain: Nationalise the banks! By Mick Brooks Tuesday, 22 January 2008 The government has now pumped about £60 billion of our money in loans and guarantees into Northern Rock. That's a lot of money - it's more than half what the health service costs. Now the NHS is looking after millions of people at any one time and hospital services are available round the clock for you in case anything goes wrong. It employs over a million people and its benefits are there for all to see.
What benefit are we getting from the money used to prop up Northern Rock? Why does a failed bank deserve to have all this money thrown at it? To New Labour's shame it is LibDem Vince Cable who points out, "This is a very small tail wagging a very large dog."
The vultures are hovering round Northern Rock. There are the shareholders on the one hand, people who think the rest of us owe them a living and, if they bet on a horse that loses, then we should just give them their money back. The existing management are still hanging on, selling off the bank's assets as fast as they can. Soon there will be nothing left worth having.
Then there are the profiteers like Richard Branson, always on hand when the government is handing out free money. Brown has made no secret that Richard Branson is the ‘preferred bidder' to take the Bank off his hands. British voters and taxpayers have the right to ask, what the bloody hell is Branson doing following the Prime Minister round China on what is supposed to be a state visit? Gordon Brown is acting more like a medieval monarch towards a fawning favourite than a modern PM. The King used to say, "I like the cut of your jib, son, consider yourself the Duke of Hertfordshire." Brown has no right to give our money away to his courtiers in this fashion!
New Labour fears that if Northern Rock goes down the tubes large chunks of the financial system could follow. And that would reverberate throughout the economy. Recession is on its way. A financial collapse could be the trigger. The right thing to do is staring Brown and Darling in the face. They should take over Northern Rock. That would not be a socialist policy. Thatcher took over the Johnson Matthey Bank for £1 after a similar collapse twenty years ago. She was a consummate representative of the capitalist system.
The government has not nationalised the Rock so far because of what Vince Cable calls their "ideological preoccupations against public ownership." They want to be seen as bigger Tories than Thatcher! They have been pathetically hoping against hope for a white knight to gallop along and solve all their problems. By dithering, they have of course made the financial crisis worse. Unite is also encouraging its members at Northern Rock to live in fantasyland by opposing nationalisation. It's time they snapped out of it.
Why are banks so special for capitalism? Why do they have to be bailed out when they fail? As Trotsky argues (Transitional Programme), "The banks concentrate in their hands the actual command over the economy." So when they have a crisis, we're all in the firing line. As Trotsky goes on, "They combine tendencies of monopoly with tendencies of anarchy... they organise high prices, crises and unemployment."
That is why, while other firms have had crises in their profits, the sums made by the financial institutions, and their share of the surplus value extracted by the working class, just goes up and up? Actually they're holding us all to ransom. And it's time it stopped.
Banks are not popular. At the time of writing I fought the Lloyds is in the charts. Even bank adverts emphasise the arrogance and poor service of ‘other' banks. The Office of Fair Trading (OFT) is taking the banks to court. They're sick of the arbitrary charges the banks put on people's accounts. Not only do the banks charge us for the privilege of borrowing our money. They don't even do us the decency of telling us how much the charges are - like selling goods with no price tag. Who will win the case? The banks will win. If the OFT gets free banking, the banks will just introduce a new structure of arbitrary charges so as to make sure their safe steady profits stay sky high.
Reject the government's Northern Rock rescue plan

The gov
http://www.marxist.com/britain-nationalise-the-banks.htm