Ever wondered who would win the American elections if the wh

posted on December 12th, 2008, 10:14 pm

Liverpool in the UK. I usually find that the others post several hours later than me, because in the US and Canada the day starts later. The bulk of the posting seems to happen late from my perspective. I often log in only to discover that some vigorous posting occurred while I was asleep in bed!

posted on December 13th, 2008, 3:28 am

5 hours ahead does that 

posted on December 13th, 2008, 5:33 am

Hmm.. I'm in Melbourne, Australia... That certainly doesn't explain why we seem to be posting at roughly the same time...

posted on December 21st, 2008, 10:30 am

Ron Paul, FTW!

posted on December 21st, 2008, 2:26 pm

I was going for General Zod personally, but... 

http://www.zod2008.com/

[Wraith]

posted on December 21st, 2008, 4:48 pm

Last edited by Wraith on December 21st, 2008, 5:24 pm, edited 1 time in total.

I personally believe that anyone who thinks socialism is even a remotely good political or economic system is either an ignorant  who has never read Marx or is just a "useful fool" unknowingly working for the left.

Anyway I dont think Obama is a socialist 

posted on December 21st, 2008, 5:12 pm

Yeah he's not a socialist, I think people for some reason got the wrong impression. Wasn't he in fact a lecturer at the University of Chicago for twelve years, quite a capitalist academic environment?

Socialism is a flawed concept from the word go. To spend wealth you need to generate wealth. A welfare system is needed because in the real world some people are less fortunate, and we don't want a situation where people are on the street if they don't have a job. But caution is advised even here since people can lose their incentive to work (as is often the case here in Britain). It is work which gives people self respect. It is work which generates wealth and powers the economy.

[ewm90]

posted on December 21st, 2008, 7:21 pm

Last edited by ewm90 on December 21st, 2008, 7:27 pm, edited 1 time in total.

USA America is socialist we have bean from conception it was the 4 fathers plain.

There never bean a fully capitalist country and I hope there never is!!! to much of any thing is to much!!

Companies goal is to earn profit thats it. We need checks and balances and regulation with out witch in a fully capitalist society would be 2ed to earning profit.

We all are socialists.

I personally believe that anyone who thinks socialism is even a remotely good political or economic system is either an ignorant  who has never read Marx or is just a "useful fool" unknowingly working for the left.

Anyway I dont think Obama is a socialist 

posted on December 21st, 2008, 7:40 pm

USA America is socialist we have bean from conception it was the 4 fathers plain.

Do you even know what socialism is? Have you read Marx?
A socialist planified economy under a totalitarian state is completely opposite to the values of personal freedom and respect for the individual property and rights on which the US was founded.

There never fully capitalist country and I hope there never is!!! to much of any thing is to much!!

Wherever you have freedom you have capitalism, competitive capitalism and free markets are the natural ways of a free society.

Companies only is to goal is to earn profit thats it. We need checks and balances and regulation with out witch in a fully capitalist society would be 2ed to earning profit.

Actually a company`s goal is to increase utility by satisfying the needs of the market, economics 101

We all are socialists.

Personally I found that insulting 

posted on January 2nd, 2009, 7:12 pm

The USA is supposed to be a democratic republic, NOT a full out democracy.

You know how we have the Presidential Candidates running for President, right? Well, we NEVER get the full story. We also hear about how things will change if X presidential candidate wins. IT Wasn't Supposed to be that way! The President is supposed to be the commander-in-chief of the Military's forces, and able to veto laws if he doesn't like them, or they go against his ethics, and sign peace treaties to state that he is the head of the USA. That's it! Nowadays we have him as Head Diplomat, Head-Head of the Closet (which shouldn't entirely exist in an official way,), and the guy who can override the Supreme Court's decisions, and so on and so forth. A President, under this definition, is actually a monarch! Sure, he only serves 4 years, maybe 8, but he's still a monarch. 

[Anonymous]

posted on January 7th, 2009, 6:02 am

Last edited by Anonymous on January 7th, 2009, 6:53 am, edited 1 time in total.

Do you even know what socialism is? Have you read Marx?
A socialist planified economy under a totalitarian state is completely opposite to the values of personal freedom and respect for the individual property and rights on which the US was founded.

Wherever you have freedom you have capitalism, competitive capitalism and free markets are the natural ways of a free society.

Actually a company`s goal is to increase utility by satisfying the needs of the market, economics 101

Personally I found that insulting 

sure. then I do believe you are against the bailouts - from Chrysler to AIG
consequently, you have to then support the very capitalist principle of speculation on oil and commodities which drove the prices through the roof, squeezing everyone due to number crunching in some remote A/C dealing room.
and lets not forget sub-prime. The fact that banks ignored "socialist" guidelines established by teh state to regulate how loans are given out, and instead issued loans at sub-rates to people who could not even pu together the principal?

Bottom line- absolute unregulated economic freedom is catastrophic. You need regulations to maintain order. REgulations when in place from a state, even state monetary influxes into the private sector resulting in the State's having a say in what happens is in principle "socialist" not "capitalist".
As regards Obama - a progressive tax structure taking into account economic strength is socialistic in nature.
Health insurance from the state partially or wholly is socialistic not capitalistic.
Medicare and Medicaid are aspects of Socialist policies not capitalist - that goes for the NHS too.

Democracy vs totalitarianism is the political aspect in the context of your quote on Marx.

Pursuant to that statement let's look at a Capitalist democracy. Do you actually have politicians that work for you, or for the lobbyist's interests that you end up being convinced to accept.
Without going into much detail - Oil.
Senator Chuck Schumer spends 3 frigging hours with asinine graphs that werent even accurate trying to convince people here in NY (his constituents) that oil supply needed to be boosted to alleviate the oil price problem we faced a few months ago. People bought it - as superficial and uncommitted to reality as most who participate in democracies are. **Socrates where are ya m8**.
All clammering for Opec to boost output. With Schumer's own claim to stall Senate trade agreements unless output were increased, everyone knew the "cause" - supply. Ready and willing to dictate terms of trade to sovereign nations. All lapped up by the astute participants of a capitalist democracy.
Once the economic downturn kicked in, we see speculation teetering off due to the Hedge fund losses. We see airlines shutting down several domestic routes due to lack of demand, and consequently we see crude oil returning slowly to normal levels. And of course - as scandal starts to become public we read several interesting articles in the Wall street journal and several related reports on CNBC. All conveniently left out yet again by FOX business and SKY- surprise surprise

without elaborating much - Our democratically elected official who is to be working for us, instead of spending time looking into means to resolve and regulate arbitrary speculation and price manipulation by OIL companies who were all through this selling and buying their own FUTURES at inflated prices which drove the prices up even more - which although "free market" and purely "capitalist" (yay for free capitalist principles once more), violates every ethical and regulatory code here on Wall Street - actually spent his time, and our tax dollars trying to SELL and SPIN the interests of his Lobbyists onto the general public.
Of course, in keeping with this carte blanche that would bluntly be called a form of sweetened totalitarianism - the Oil future issue is not associated with Schumer's rants. Instead cited as an example of Wall Street's greed, while the facilitator slips away as an innocent and now DAFT politician. convenient. Interesting when Bush says Wall Street got drunk - his style of policies supplied the Booze!

So then what's worse - a state that openly  tells its citizens to shove off, or one that spends time spinning (cos deceiving maybe shocking for some) to twist public opinion and bring it in line with special agendas that in essence constitute the same "shove off" - except here we are insulted and convinced into liking it LOL. Is there truly any difference in a democratic sense? of which people, by which people, and most importantly FOR which people indeed.
** Plebs lending legitimacy to an oligarchy of Optimates and Populares.**

In the end, a purely capitalist economy is unrealistic. The last time a pure capitalist economy was running was right before it plunged itself into a depression - by its very nature.

Sure free as a bird. sure encouraging innovation. Empty taglines - good for billboards and textbooks directed at inexperienced college students.
Inspect the fundamental nature of capitalism and the end result of such policies and we see that each time right wing nutjobs or overzealous Relics regurgitate Cold war rhetoric we have an economy that teeters into recessions and depressions. And please do not quote the Reagan era -supply side economics suited that specific geo-political environment which was also influenced by oil price changes due to IRan/Iraq, and other Gold/Silver trading related issues on the futures markets.
Attempted "supply side" crap couldn't help out during this nose dive.

If a person then touts pure capitalism today, he has no idea of the fundamental principles that constitute mixed economies and is bent on regurgitating texbook material and irrelevant rhetoric he picked up from watching Fox and Skynews - rupert murdoch no wonder lol.

by the way - taxation itself is socialistic. The amendment that was passed to our own Constitution was never ratified in congress.
the capitalist aspect of our constitution clearly states our income is ours. State interference and arbitrary deductions under pain of jail or huge fines, in of itself is non-democratic and totalitarian and frankly non-Capitalistic. So what are our economies today? and who feels we have pure capitalism without any socialism.?

Also - please stop referring to Marx as synonymous with socialism. He was preceded and succeeded by many including Robert Owen, Charles fourier, Pierre Leroux, Saint Simon etc