Rand Paul Wants To Cut $500 billion By Cutting Defense, Shutting Down Education Dept.
395 replies, posted
It was more directed towards my fellow libertarian here.
(I'm concerned he's trolling you guys).
[editline]20th January 2011[/editline]
-snip- double posted
[QUOTE=Derubermensch;27556108]It was more directed towards my fellow libertarian here.
(I'm concerned he's trolling you guys).
[editline]20th January 2011[/editline]
It was more directed towards my fellow libertarian here.
(I'm concerned he's trolling you guys).[/QUOTE]
I suppose that may be the case. It's good to know not all Libertarians are like Strider at least.
[QUOTE=imasillypiggy;27555989]So didnt this work for china or for people in the early 1900nds?
why do people work at walkmart or gamestop if they treat there workers so bad?
why dont Africans demand more money for there hard work? Sure soem businesses will give a little more but they will be filled up fast also what is to stop companies from simply using machines instead of workers? machines do the work better and they dont have to hire anyone.[/QUOTE]
China didn't go through industrialization during the 1900s.
African's don't produce much man what are you talking about. Most of their society and economy is primitive.
[editline]21st January 2011[/editline]
I'm not really trolling. I can accept that the Nazi party was not completely socialist but that quote of Goebbels was intended to strengthen my argument about socialism as collectivism.
We are already leaps and bounds ahead military-wise. any development we do now is just to see just how many pieces we can make people into.
[QUOTE=Strider*;27556332]China didn't go through industrialization during the 1900s.
African's don't produce much man what are you talking about. Most of their society and economy is primitive.
[editline]21st January 2011[/editline]
I'm not really trolling. I can accept that the Nazi party was not completely socialist but that quote of Goebbels was intended to strengthen my argument about socialism as collectivism.[/QUOTE]
The National "Socialist" party DOESN'T HAVE A THING TO DO WITH SOCIALISM.
We learn this in grade school. So do most other people.
[QUOTE=Strider*;27556332]China didn't go through industrialization during the 1900s.
African's don't produce much man what are you talking about. Most of their society and economy is primitive.
[editline]21st January 2011[/editline]
I'm not really trolling. I can accept that the Nazi party was not completely socialist but that quote of Goebbels was intended to strengthen my argument about socialism as collectivism.[/QUOTE]
First Africa is very resource rich. 2nd what about america in the early 90s before they had regulation or walmart and the monopoly thing.
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;27556621]The National "Socialist" party DOESN'T HAVE A THING TO DO WITH SOCIALISM.
We learn this in grade school. So do most other people.[/QUOTE]
It began as socialist but they threw most of that ideology and transformed into a complete bureaucratically controlled country after Hitler obtained his power through collectivism.
Hmm kinda sounds like Stalin another famous collectivist.
Hitler in 1927:
"We are socialists, we are enemies of today’s capitalistic economic system for the exploitation of the economically weak, with its unfair salaries, with its unseemly evaluation of a human being according to wealth and property instead of responsibility and performance, and we are determined to destroy this system under all conditions"
[editline]21st January 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=imasillypiggy;27557022]First Africa is very resource rich. 2nd what about america in the early 90s before they had regulation or walmart and the monopoly thing.[/QUOTE]
America in the early 1900s?
Our standard of living was very high in comparison to the rest of the world.
[QUOTE=Strider*;27557145]It began as socialist but they threw most of that ideology and transformed into a complete bureaucratically controlled country after Hitler obtained his power through collectivism.
Hmm kinda sounds like Stalin another famous collectivist.
Hitler in 1927:
"We are socialists, we are enemies of today’s capitalistic economic system for the exploitation of the economically weak, with its unfair salaries, with its unseemly evaluation of a human being according to wealth and property instead of responsibility and performance, and we are determined to destroy this system under all conditions"
[editline]21st January 2011[/editline]
America in the early 1900s?
Our standard of living was very high in comparison to the rest of the world.[/QUOTE]
Nazism, in rhetoric, positioned itself as socialist because during the 1920s and 1930s, socialism was very popular in Europe. It was, in both theory and practice, not socialist at all; instead of having government-controlled industry, it used government to make industry powerful.
[QUOTE=Strider*;27557145]America in the early 1900s?
Our standard of living was very high in comparison to the rest of the world.[/QUOTE]
Children got there hands cut off in machines while working 12 hours a day. when they came home they only had enough to live with 10 other people in a small apartment. what kind of history book have you been reading?
Also whats to stop slavery?
[QUOTE=imasillypiggy;27557318]Children got there hands cut off in machines while working 12 hours a day. when they came home they only had enough to live with 10 other people in a small apartment. what kind of history book have you been reading?
Also whats to stop slavery?[/QUOTE]
I don't understand did people's limbs regenerate in the 1900's?
What do you know, the DPRK is one of the most democratic republics in the world. They even say so themselves, and it's in their name!
[QUOTE=Strider*;27557145]collectivism.
[/QUOTE]
[img]http://www.mandypatinkin.net/PB/inigo1.jpeg[/img]
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
[QUOTE=Strider*;27557379]I don't understand did people's limbs regenerate in the 1900's?[/QUOTE]
Because there were no regulations the workers were treated really bad. This is shown in china and africa now for the 5th time explain how taking away business regulations again in America will have a different outcome.
[QUOTE=Strider*;27557145]It began as socialist but they threw most of that ideology and transformed into a complete bureaucratically controlled country after Hitler obtained his power through collectivism.
Hmm kinda sounds like Stalin another famous collectivist.
Hitler in 1927:
"We are socialists, we are enemies of today’s capitalistic economic system for the exploitation of the economically weak, with its unfair salaries, with its unseemly evaluation of a human being according to wealth and property instead of responsibility and performance, and we are determined to destroy this system under all conditions"
[editline]21st January 2011[/editline]
America in the early 1900s?
Our standard of living was very high in comparison to the rest of the world.[/QUOTE]
Hitler said whatever he had to to get where ever he had to. This is well known. And stalin wasn't a communist or a socialist. He was a dictator. Dictator ship =/= socialism.
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;27557636]Hitler said whatever he had to to get where ever he had to. This is well known. And stalin wasn't a communist or a socialist. He was a dictator. Dictator ship =/= socialism.[/QUOTE]
And a collectivist.
[QUOTE=Strider*;27557658]And a collectivist.[/QUOTE]
Collectivsim =/= socialsim
socialism =/= communism
[QUOTE=Xen Tricks;27557430]What do you know, the DPRK is one of the most democratic republics in the world. They even say so themselves, and it's in their name![/QUOTE]
I have never made the argument that the Nazi party was socialist because of it's name.
Go back and read the fucking posts.
You just wanted to get a witty comment in.
[editline]21st January 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;27557668]Collectivsim =/= socialsim
socialism =/= communism[/QUOTE]
Explain to me how socialism can exist without collectivism.
Or in alternative how it ISN'T collectivism.
You all keep saying "NO NO NO you don't understand collectivism" but you haven't even came up with a material argument.
[editline]21st January 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;27557668]Collectivsim =/= socialsim
socialism =/= communism[/QUOTE]
Explain to me how socialism can exist without collectivism.
Or in alternative how it ISN'T collectivism.
You all keep saying "NO NO NO you don't understand collectivism" but you haven't even came up with a material argument.
[QUOTE=Strider*;27557685]I have never made the argument that the Nazi party was socialist because of it's name.
Go back and read the fucking posts.
You just wanted to get a witty comment in.
[editline]21st January 2011[/editline]
Explain to me how socialism can exist without collectivism.
Or in alternative how it ISN'T collectivism.
You all keep saying "NO NO NO you don't understand collectivism" but you haven't even came up with a material argument.
[editline]21st January 2011[/editline]
Explain to me how socialism can exist without collectivism.
Or in alternative how it ISN'T collectivism.
You all keep saying "NO NO NO you don't understand collectivism" but you haven't even came up with a material argument.[/QUOTE]
No you made the argument based on what Hitler said during while he was trying to get power. Not so much, you know, what they did.
[QUOTE=Strider*;27557685]I have never made the argument that the Nazi party was socialist because of it's name.
Go back and read the fucking posts.
You just wanted to get a witty comment in.
[editline]21st January 2011[/editline]
Explain to me how socialism can exist without collectivism.
Or in alternative how it ISN'T collectivism.
You all keep saying "NO NO NO you don't understand collectivism" but you haven't even came up with a material argument.
[editline]21st January 2011[/editline]
Explain to me how socialism can exist without collectivism.
Or in alternative how it ISN'T collectivism.
You all keep saying "NO NO NO you don't understand collectivism" but you haven't even came up with a material argument.[/QUOTE]
Because collectivism is based on government organised and controlled work. All work. Socialsim is a middle ground of some government controlled industries and a regulated "free" market. It works really well. Something history has proved and is proving.
As it disproved laissez faire economies in the last 2 centuries.
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;27557809]Because collectivism is based on government organised and controlled work. All work. Socialsim is a middle ground of some government controlled industries and a regulated "free" market. It works really well. Something history has proved and is proving.
As it disproved laissez faire economies in the last 2 centuries.[/QUOTE]
Well in that definition socialism encourages and eventually leads to collectivism.
And I strongly disagree with you I believe western history has proven the power laissez-faire capitalism has at improving the lives and providing equality for all people.
[QUOTE=Strider*;27558267]Well in that definition socialism encourages and eventually leads to collectivism.
And I strongly disagree with you I believe western history has proven the power laissez-faire capitalism has at improving the lives and providing equality for all people.[/QUOTE]
Sure did that in england in the 1800's. Sure did that. You know, i'll give you this, it does let people succeed. It also grinds others to the ground based on no fault of their own. It also causes great misery. It doesn't help us. It doesn't make us a better society.
We're not barbarians. We should be trying to help each other out of the mud.
And no it doesn't. Just because you lean a way doesn't mean you fall that way.
[QUOTE=Strider*;27558267]
And I strongly disagree with you I believe western history has proven the power laissez-faire capitalism has at improving the lives and providing equality for all people.[/QUOTE]
Provided you weren't someone who needed such extravagances as "a safe work environment" and "daylight."
[QUOTE=Mingebox;27558367]Provided you weren't someone who needed such extravagances as "a safe work environment" and "daylight."[/QUOTE]
"basic education"
[QUOTE=Strider*;27558267]
And I strongly disagree with you I believe western history has proven the power laissez-faire capitalism has at improving the lives and providing equality for all people.[/QUOTE]
so long as you're white and in the western world and you weren't born poor
but if you live in, say, bhopal india, or were a coal miner in the 1800's being paid in scrip, or the child of a poor family in industrial era london, or living in Nigeria where oil spills comparable to the one in the gulf coast are caused by american companies on a regular basis but are never paid for, you've been sorta fucked by the "power of laissez-faire capitalism"
[QUOTE=Strider*;27558267]Well in that definition socialism encourages and eventually leads to collectivism.
And I strongly disagree with you I believe western history has proven the power laissez-faire capitalism has at improving the lives and providing equality for all people.[/QUOTE]
Socialism doesn't lead to Collectivism, and honestly, Collectivism isn't really a political or social ideology on its own. If anything, Socialism leads to Communism, except in the case of a mixed free small businesses/regulated big businesses, with extensive social programs.
[QUOTE=Sigma-Lambda;27559238]so long as you're white and in the western world and you weren't born poor
but if you live in, say, bhopal india, or were a coal miner in the 1800's being paid in scrip, or the child of a poor family in industrial era london, or living in Nigeria where oil spills comparable to the one in the gulf coast are caused by american companies on a regular basis but are never paid for, you've been sorta fucked by the "power of laissez-faire capitalism"[/QUOTE]
I hope you do remember those regions of the world are/were the way they are/were because of government-funded monopolies over the regions by the colonial empires of Britain and France. :smug:
Such is not an example of free-market enterprise.
[QUOTE=Sigma-Lambda;27559238]...or living in Nigeria where oil spills comparable to the one in the gulf coast are caused by american companies on a regular basis but are never paid for...[/quote]
You realize Shell is a Anglo-Dutch company, and not American, right?
[QUOTE=Sector 7;27517423]I don't know enough about the Education dept. to say they don't need money, but I'm 100% behind cutting the military's budget. [b]Far[/b] too much money goes into useless pet projects like the F22/35.[/QUOTE]
Don't you dare talk about my pride and joy (F22) like that ever again.
[img_thumb]http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2756/4370737876_02de2d4121_b.jpg[/img_thumb] :911:
[QUOTE=Broseph_;27566938]You realize Shell is a Anglo-Dutch company, and not American, right?[/QUOTE]
pardon me, minor slip. Doesn't really change my point, though
[QUOTE=Strider*;27558267]Well in that definition socialism encourages and eventually leads to collectivism.
And I strongly disagree with you I believe western history has proven the power laissez-faire capitalism has at [b]improving the lives and providing equality for all people.[/b][/QUOTE]
sorry to bring it back to this but fucking LOL
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.