Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

[ShockingButTrue]

It's clearly a knee-jerk reaction to the hatred of our current President. Even Ray Charles can see that. Plain stupid. What about "Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness?"

That kind of hate has serious repercussions, as it appears are approaching rapidly.

#UNITY

[C0|dB|00ded]

Surely you wouldn't be satisfied if I respond simply by saying "Capitalism has resulted in exorbitant resource consumption.

Beyond being unsatisfied. Capitalism is the best steward of natural resources ever devised. Price limits consumption.

Hopefully we can agree that some regulations are good. It's good for companies to have to meet certain food regulations. It's good for companies to experience consequences if they pollute too much.

Nobody with an IQ over 75 would advocate for totally unrestricted markets. We have laws, we have basic rules to the game. But what you are attempting to avoid talking about through pedantic keyboard somersaults is the fact that your party has gone hard Socialist in a matter of a few years. They are advocating the government takeover of everything they don't like. These are simple-minded ideas created by simpletons or worse...

The right is using socialism as this boogeyman to scare people away from universal healthcare

Because Socialism/Communism IS the boogeyman as far as civilized society is concerned. It creates poverty and poverty causes death. End of story.

At what point would you say the United States is more socialist than capitalist?

At the same point that I say the United States's best days are behind us. We are literally on the precipice of that becoming a reality. Universal healthcare will be the tipping point where we begin handing over the leadership of the free world in science, innovation, and peace (no more) to our communist-loving adversaries.


T


...:cool:

[ShockingButTrue]

You're comparing apples to oranges, both (1) by conflating Soviet and Maoist policies with general socialism and (2) by comparing deaths under those regimes to a reduction in poverty. Surely you wouldn't be satisfied if I respond simply by saying "Capitalism has resulted in exorbitant resource consumption. Socialism kept the trains running on time." Those aren't the same thing.

Obviously, loads of people died under tyrannical communist governments throughout the history of the world. Undoubtedly that is true. Loads of people have died in the name of capitalism, though, too. Unregulated capitalism (to be clear, no one in this thread appears to be supporting such a thing) allowed millions to be sold into slavery. Unregulated capitalism provides incentives to engage in international wars over resource allocation. That could be anything from oil to diamonds to water. Unregulated capitalism, objectively this is true, means that individual firms do not feel the consequences of their externalities (by definition). If I can make $100, I don't care if I caused $100,000 worth of air pollution. Across the board, we can point to examples of injuries or deaths caused by capitalism, and millions more that could have been caused had a government not stepped in with key rules and regulations.

Capitalism is really good at leading to innovation. But it obviously has some problems. But only the most extreme (and I'm sure there are some on here) would ever want to go to an Upton-Sinclair-era form of capitalism. Right? Hopefully we can agree that some regulations are good. It's good for companies to have to meet certain food regulations. It's good for companies to experience consequences if they pollute too much.

And America's current brand of capitalism does an okay job at things like preventing slavery, at regulating food production, at regulating pollution, etc. But that's kind of the crux of the point: we are not an unfettered capitalistic society. There is a spectrum between socialism and capitalism. And things like Medicare for all and college tuition are certainly more toward the socialism end than the capitalism end, but so are public k-12 education, the FDA, and progressive tax brackets. The right is using socialism as this boogeyman to scare people away from universal healthcare, et al, rather than debating the merits of each particular point.

At what point would you say the United States is more socialist than capitalist?

Substantive jd.

But back to the context, and I'm assuming that would be the title of this thread, the green initiative wants to subsidize those unwilling to work? Case closed.



#UNITY

[jdshock]

the soviet and the Maoist policies both lead to 10s of millions of deaths.

Capitalism has lead to a drastic reduction in worldwide absolute poverty.

Neither of these statements says anything about the morality of the economic system, but they do offer harsh contrasts in results. Would you disagree with these statements or assessments?

You're comparing apples to oranges, both (1) by conflating Soviet and Maoist policies with general socialism and (2) by comparing deaths under those regimes to a reduction in poverty. Surely you wouldn't be satisfied if I respond simply by saying "Capitalism has resulted in exorbitant resource consumption. Socialism kept the trains running on time." Those aren't the same thing.

Obviously, loads of people died under tyrannical communist governments throughout the history of the world. Undoubtedly that is true. Loads of people have died in the name of capitalism, though, too. Unregulated capitalism (to be clear, no one in this thread appears to be supporting such a thing) allowed millions to be sold into slavery. Unregulated capitalism provides incentives to engage in international wars over resource allocation. That could be anything from oil to diamonds to water. Unregulated capitalism, objectively this is true, means that individual firms do not feel the consequences of their externalities (by definition). If I can make $100, I don't care if I caused $100,000 worth of air pollution. Across the board, we can point to examples of injuries or deaths caused by capitalism, and millions more that could have been caused had a government not stepped in with key rules and regulations.

Capitalism is really good at leading to innovation. But it obviously has some problems. But only the most extreme (and I'm sure there are some on here) would ever want to go to an Upton-Sinclair-era form of capitalism. Right? Hopefully we can agree that some regulations are good. It's good for companies to have to meet certain food regulations. It's good for companies to experience consequences if they pollute too much.

And America's current brand of capitalism does an okay job at things like preventing slavery, at regulating food production, at regulating pollution, etc. But that's kind of the crux of the point: we are not an unfettered capitalistic society. There is a spectrum between socialism and capitalism. And things like Medicare for all and college tuition are certainly more toward the socialism end than the capitalism end, but so are public k-12 education, the FDA, and progressive tax brackets. The right is using socialism as this boogeyman to scare people away from universal healthcare, et al, rather than debating the merits of each particular point.

At what point would you say the United States is more socialist than capitalist?

[abdullah_sharif]

they could be wealthy if theyd get off their ass amd work.

[wufan]

Some real top shelf analysis going on in here right now. Here, let me try to join in:

Can you believe all these brainwashed, right-wing children that will come into power without having any understanding of what damage capitalism has done to millions and millions of people all over the globe throughout recent history?

or what about....

Capitalism and anyone advocating for it are either intellectually lazy or tyrannical oppressors.

or maybe...

Capitalists don't care about the rich, they just hate the poor.

Whoa... that does feel good to just spout unsupported nonsense, completely devoid of even an ounce of nuance. Let's continue to pretend like the only two economic models are pure, unfettered capitalism and then some weird post-apocalyptic, tyrannical communism. Note: I did try re-working Doc's assertion that "socialist lefties" have goals of (1) killing all the babies they can and (2) making sure that everyone has weed. Unfortunately, I found it too hard to parody.

the soviet and the Maoist policies both lead to 10s of millions of deaths.

Capitalism has lead to a drastic reduction in worldwide absolute poverty.

Neither of these statements says anything about the morality of the economic system, but they do offer harsh contrasts in results. Would you disagree with these statements or assessments?

[ShockerPrez]

This thread could just be devoted to making fun of AOC.... She hasn't really used much nuance lately.

[ShockingButTrue]

Some real top shelf analysis going on in here right now. Here, let me try to join in:

Can you believe all these brainwashed, right-wing children that will come into power without having any understanding of what damage capitalism has done to millions and millions of people all over the globe throughout recent history?

or what about....

Capitalism and anyone advocating for it are either intellectually lazy or tyrannical oppressors.

or maybe...

Capitalists don't care about the rich, they just hate the poor.

Whoa... that does feel good to just spout unsupported nonsense, completely devoid of even an ounce of nuance. Let's continue to pretend like the only two economic models are pure, unfettered capitalism and then some weird post-apocalyptic, tyrannical communism. Note: I did try re-working Doc's assertion that "socialist lefties" have goals of (1) killing all the babies they can and (2) making sure that everyone has weed. Unfortunately, I found it too hard to parody.

got another one...

Capitalists have the moral authority.

Isn't that just cringe-worthy? Nuanced? Substantive enough? No you know how we feel.

Pretty cheeky jd.

[jdshock]

I sincerely believe KW, Prez, Doc, and Wufan are all capable of nuance. My post was to highlight that this particular thread had turned into a mindless echo chamber where no one was saying anything of value.

In point of fact, I'd be shocked if more than 25% of that group were cousin kissers...

I kid...

[Shock Top]

Some real top shelf analysis going on in here right now. Here, let me try to join in:

Can you believe all these brainwashed, right-wing children that will come into power without having any understanding of what damage capitalism has done to millions and millions of people all over the globe throughout recent history?

or what about....

Capitalism and anyone advocating for it are either intellectually lazy or tyrannical oppressors.

or maybe...

Capitalists don't care about the rich, they just hate the poor.

Whoa... that does feel good to just spout unsupported nonsense, completely devoid of even an ounce of nuance. Let's continue to pretend like the only two economic models are pure, unfettered capitalism and then some weird post-apocalyptic, tyrannical communism. Note: I did try re-working Doc's assertion that "socialist lefties" have goals of (1) killing all the babies they can and (2) making sure that everyone has weed. Unfortunately, I found it too hard to parody.

So, let’s hear your brilliant ways to save the world than skip! Since you are CLEARLY so much smarter than these hillbilly, cousin-kissin’, righties on here.

Tell us how you can help save us idiots from ourselves, or maybe you just like sitting on your ivory tower drinking high tea and laughing at dem conservatives “lack of nuance”.

[ShockerPrez]

This is the culmination of nearly 100 years of politicians 1-upping last years promises that the government will provide.

[ShockerPrez]

When I say intellectually lazy, I mean the easiest solution to a problem for a socialist is "government takes over". "Government makes it fair". That is a lazy answer, and is basically what every socialist advocates.

And socialists say what you did about capitalism all the time.

It's a idealogical statement.

America's solutions will not be found in Washington. That's all.

[WuDrWu]

When your side, not just politically but legislatively, gets up and cheers the protection of late term abortion, you deserve all the hyperbole that comes your way.

[jdshock]

Some real top shelf analysis going on in here right now. Here, let me try to join in:

Can you believe all these brainwashed, right-wing children that will come into power without having any understanding of what damage capitalism has done to millions and millions of people all over the globe throughout recent history?

or what about....

Capitalism and anyone advocating for it are either intellectually lazy or tyrannical oppressors.

or maybe...

Capitalists don't care about the rich, they just hate the poor.

Whoa... that does feel good to just spout unsupported nonsense, completely devoid of even an ounce of nuance. Let's continue to pretend like the only two economic models are pure, unfettered capitalism and then some weird post-apocalyptic, tyrannical communism. Note: I did try re-working Doc's assertion that "socialist lefties" have goals of (1) killing all the babies they can and (2) making sure that everyone has weed. Unfortunately, I found it too hard to parody.

[ShockingButTrue]

haters fits