Stuff Republicans say.

[Midnight Rain]

I'm leery of both extremes.....

As you should be. But how would one go about maintaining a balance?

 

[Dirty Penguin]

Actually, you only stated the name without a specific supported allegation.

We were both speaking in general terms when talking about crony capitalism....I merely pointed out that the Koch's, the Romneys and anyone from any political ideology could be added. You brought up their supposed social stances but that has nothing to do with what we were talking about unless you were trying to deflect.

 

[Revoltingest]

We were both speaking in general terms when talking about crony capitalism....I merely pointed out that the Koch's, the Romneys and anyone from any political ideology could be added. You brought up their supposed social stances but that has nothing to do with what we were talking about unless you were trying to deflect.

I'm merely skeptical naming someone for critcism without actually making any.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

I'm merely skeptical naming someone for critcism without actually making any.

Obviously not because you did the exact opposite of what you say you don't do. But that wasn't important which is why I responded the same way......

Stuff Republicans say. | Page 31 | ReligiousForums.com

Those who benefit from corruption (eg, Clintons, Elon Musk, Bear Stearns) will of course be happy with crony capitalism. I'd love to burst their bubbles.

It's not important to me that you never cited any evidence to back up your charge of crony capitalism...because to me it wasn't important that you do so. I happen to agree with you but just wanted to add a couple more to the list as well as acknowledging the love affair with crony capitalism that exist in every party we have.

 

[Revoltingest]

Obviously not because you did the exact opposite of what you say you don't do.

Oh, the old "I know you are but what am I" technique.

It's not important to me that you never cited any evidence to back up your charge of crony capitalism...because to me it wasn't important that you do so. I happen to agree with you but just wanted to add a couple more to the list as well as acknowledging the love affair with crony capitalism that exist in every party we have.

So....you don't see a difference between The Big Two & other parties regarding crony capitalism? I suppose this helps you hold your nose when you vote for more of the same.
Anyway, if you want support for my claim that anyone plays the crony capitalism game, just name'm & I'll provide.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

Oh, the old "I know you are but what am I" technique.

That's not what it was. You commented. I agreed but added more folks who like their crony capitalism.

So....you don't see a difference between The Big Two & other parties regarding crony capitalism? I suppose this helps you hold your nose when you vote for more of the same.

What difference? Do some dems like crony capitalism....Yes and there are evidences that support the claim that some of them do. Do pubs like crony capitalism....Yes and there's evidences that some of them do. Do libs like crony capitalism...Yes and there's evidences that some of them do. All political parties lobby congress to get the things they find most pleasing to them....Some are responsible for writing and/or sponsoring cookie cutter legislation that get enacted into law all around this country. Some congress members in turn leave and head right over and work for many of these companies....

Anyway, if you want support for my claim that anyone plays the crony capitalism game, just name'm & I'll provide.

But that's just it...I didn't need for you to support your claim that the Clinton's or anyone else love crony capitalism. I agree with you...but I believe it isn't isolated to one or two parties. I think it's widespread throughout.

 

[metis]

As expected, we see the excuses and distortions from some on the right, along with newly invented "facts". However, to set the record straight:

Below, you will see some of the most socialistic nations in the world today:

• China
• Denmark
• Finland
• Netherlands
• Canada
• Sweden
• Norway
• Ireland
• New Zealand
• Belgium...

In China the government manages and controls the economy. Many of the domestic companies are owned and run by the government. Recently, the Chinese economy has become more geared towards capitalism, but is still officially socialist. Life in China remains relatively less stressful and more relaxed than life in capitalist countries like America. -- Top 10 Most Socialist Countries in the World - Peerform BlogPeerform | Peer to Peer Lending Blog

On the other hand, the Communist Party of China (CPC) carefully directs the country’s growth. Buttressed by government subsidies, state-owned enterprises (SOEs) maintain a dominating presence in the domestic market — largely in the banking, transportation, telecommunication and energy sectors — and often prevent competition. In all, the public sector accounts for approximately 30% of China’s economy. Government presence in the market is apparent in its regulation of the RMB and reserve requirements for banks. Though regulations for the latter have been loosening steadily in an effort to encourage loan availability, SOEs usually receive preferential treatment. -- Stuff Republicans say. | Page 31 | ReligiousForums.com

BTW, Hong Kong and Shanghai are in China but not China. Also, I am not in favor of centralized and authoritarian rule of either the political or economic system even if it produces greater economic growth.

 

[metis]

Crony capitalism is inevitable to a point, but that point should be as narrow as possible, imo. I trust big corporations as much as I trust big government-- not. And to be clear, socialism need not rely on crony capitalism to any significant degree, but that of course depends on the type of socialistic system selected.

 

[Revoltingest]

That's not what it was. You commented. I agreed but added more folks who like their crony capitalism.

What difference? Do some dems like crony capitalism....Yes and there are evidences that support the claim that some of them do. Do pubs like crony capitalism....Yes and there's evidences that some of them do. Do libs like crony capitalism...Yes and there's evidences that some of them do. All political parties lobby congress to get the things they find most pleasing to them....Some are responsible for writing and/or sponsoring cookie cutter legislation that get enacted into law all around this country. Some congress members in turn leave and head right over and work for many of these companies....

But that's just it...I didn't need for you to support your claim that the Clinton's or anyone else love crony capitalism. I agree with you...but I believe it isn't isolated to one or two parties. I think it's widespread throughout.

I have an idea....let's just agree that crony capitalism is evil wherever it occurs.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

What modern society without capitalism is anything other than fascist?

This is why I keep insisting that a belief that you must have capitalism to be free is no different than believing you need god or a gun to be free. Capitalism only means market freedom; it does not guarantee social freedoms, equality, or any sort of liberty beyond the market. Simply put, there were free societies and repressed societies before capitalism, during capitalism, and it is likely they will both still be around after capitalism. Market freedoms have absolutely nothing to do with social freedoms.
And, yes, there are numerous modern societies that have either a heavily regulated form of capitalism that leans heavily into socialism, or no capitalism at all that aren't fascist.

No. I see more general oppression, in which Pub men oppressing women is just a subset. I still note that you don't acknowledge the larger problem, ie, that oppression can happen to both men & women by both men & women. Again, I say that it's dysfunctional & sexist to blame only men, & especially only Pub men.

I'm not denying it (I actually did acknowledge it), but I am calling the male Rs for trying to control a woman's reproductive choices. Even when you move to the bigger picture, you still have to call out those who are a part of the whole. And in this case, another R just made another absurd "legit rape" statement, so yes, it is a serious problem within the Republican party.

Well, that's just silly. Laws which prevent monopolies, for example, help keep markets free, which is good for capitalism.

Ergo, capitalism must, upfront and deliberately, be inhibited.

 

[Revoltingest]

This is why I keep insisting that a belief that you must have capitalism to be free is no different than believing you need god or a gun to be free.

The "god" argument to me is falling on deaf ears.

Capitalism only means market freedom; it does not guarantee social freedoms, equality, or any sort of liberty beyond the market.

Well, spluh! Capitalism is an economic system, & won't achieve everything we want. We also need a government to handle non-economic (& some economic) matters. Many things are useful even though they don't solve every problem.

Simply put, there were free societies and repressed societies before capitalism, during capitalism, and it is likely they will both still be around after capitalism. Market freedoms have absolutely nothing to do with social freedoms.
And, yes, there are numerous modern societies that have either a heavily regulated form of capitalism that leans heavily into socialism, or no capitalism at all that aren't fascist.

The problem is that without freedom of economic association, one's ability to survive is more limited. And the power to prevent free association would be great indeed, risking oppression. Capitalism is more decentralized, & doesn't need such extensive governmental authority to prevent free association.

I'm not denying it (I actually did acknowledge it), but I am calling the male Rs for trying to control a woman's reproductive choices. Even when you move to the bigger picture, you still have to call out those who are a part of the whole. And in this case, another R just made another absurd "legit rape" statement, so yes, it is a serious problem within the Republican party.
Ergo, capitalism must, upfront and deliberately, be inhibited.

Capitalism must be inhibited because Republican males oppose abortion?
For once, I am speechless.

 

[metis]

It was mostly capitalism that mostly led to the Great Depression and the Great Recession and also the many baby recessions, but obviously there are also some other factors as well that contribute to these "bumps". One of the biggest problems is that all too many of us don't seem to realize that this is one of the characteristics of capitalism, and that this is, hypothetically at least, mostly correctable.

I plan on starting a thread on this either later today or on Sunday.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

The problem is that without freedom of economic association, one's ability to survive is more limited.

Actually a community sharing resources best ensures the survival of each individual. If you contribute, you are fed, you are clothed, and you have shelter. Under capitalism, you must be able to afford these things that otherwise would have been given to you for your contributions.

Capitalism must be inhibited because Republican males oppose abortion?
For once, I am speechless.

What the ****? Where the **** did you get that from?

 

[Revoltingest]

Actually a community sharing resources best ensures the survival of each individual. If you contribute, you are fed, you are clothed, and you have shelter. Under capitalism, you must be able to afford these things that otherwise would have been given to you for your contributions.

Right not, under what's left of capitalism in Americastan, you can get together with like minded folk, & form a community wherein you share as you see fit. I just don't want that imposed upon me, nor do I want a government with enuf power to impose it. Do as you please (voluntarily), but don't expect me to knuckle under to that utopia.

What the ****? Where the **** did you get that from?

I paraphrased this....
"I'm not denying it (I actually did acknowledge it), but I am calling the male Rs for trying to control a woman's reproductive choices. Even when you move to the bigger picture, you still have to call out those who are a part of the whole. And in this case, another R just made another absurd "legit rape" statement, so yes, it is a serious problem within the Republican party.
Ergo, capitalism must, upfront and deliberately, be inhibited."

My weltanschauung is larger than women's reproductive rights vs male Republicans. Justice is about fighting all oppression of anyone, regardless of which party or gender is doing the oppressing.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Right not, under what's left of capitalism in Americastan, you can get together with like minded folk, & form a community wherein you share as you see fit. I just don't want that imposed upon me, nor do I want a government with enuf power to impose it. Do as you please (voluntarily), but don't expect me to knuckle under to that utopia.

And guess what? It isn't capitalism that allows for this

I paraphrased this....
"I'm not denying it (I actually did acknowledge it), but I am calling the male Rs for trying to control a woman's reproductive choices. Even when you move to the bigger picture, you still have to call out those who are a part of the whole. And in this case, another R just made another absurd "legit rape" statement, so yes, it is a serious problem within the Republican party.
Ergo, capitalism must, upfront and deliberately, be inhibited."

Because apparently such a strong objection to the way you meshed my replies together didn't make you realize you got it wrong:

No. I see more general oppression, in which Pub men oppressing women is just a subset. I still note that you don't acknowledge the larger problem, ie, that oppression can happen to both men & women by both men & women. Again, I say that it's dysfunctional & sexist to blame only men, & especially only Pub men.
I'm not denying it (I actually did acknowledge it), but I am calling the male Rs for trying to control a woman's reproductive choices. Even when you move to the bigger picture, you still have to call out those who are a part of the whole. And in this case, another R just made another absurd "legit rape" statement, so yes, it is a serious problem within the Republican party.

Well, that's just silly. Laws which prevent monopolies, for example, help keep markets free, which is good for capitalism.
Ergo, capitalism must, upfront and deliberately, be inhibited.

So, no, I never made some dumb claim that capitalism must be inhibited to protect a woman's right to choose. It's very illogical to believe I ever would claim such a thing, since I so sharply divide economic freedoms from social freedoms.

 

[Revoltingest]

And guess what? It isn't capitalism that allows for this

Capitalism does allow it...in the sense that capitalism is compatible with it, ie, it doesn't prevent voluntary communism. But it raises a question...if communism is so attractive, why do so few take the voluntary option? Instead, it's typically proposed as something universal, ie, for all without exception.

Because apparently such a strong objection to the way you meshed my replies together didn't make you realize you got it wrong:

I quoted your post exactly as you posted it, so I beg tolerance for mistaking your reasoning.

I'm not denying it (I actually did acknowledge it), but I am calling the male Rs for trying to control a woman's reproductive choices.

I find your objection reasonable. But why not object to anyone (male or female, Pub or Dem) controlling women's reproductive choices?

Even when you move to the bigger picture, you still have to call out those who are a part of the whole. And in this case, another R just made another absurd "legit rape" statement, so yes, it is a serious problem within the Republican party.

This seems a political outlook based solely upon an anti-Republican & pro-abortion perspective.

So, no, I never made some dumb claim that capitalism must be inhibited to protect a woman's right to choose. It's very illogical to believe I ever would claim such a thing, since I so sharply divide economic freedoms from social freedoms.

Again, I suspect it was just a quirk of editing in your post. I only read what I saw....& it did seem very odd, hence my speechlessness.

I'll pay you 10 frubals to quit using that purple color in your font. It really messes up my responses....random colors....random insertions if quotie thingies....updates not fully taking.

 

[metis]

Actually a community sharing resources best ensures the survival of each individual. If you contribute, you are fed, you are clothed, and you have shelter. Under capitalism, you must be able to afford these things that otherwise would have been given to you for your contributions.

I think you're likely to agree with this:

For the vast majority of our existence as humans, or so it appears based on comparative studies, "capitalism" was very far from being the norm, especially since it tends to support greed and hoarding, Take a look at our medical system here in the States as an example.

We have this for-profit system that is terribly costly (17+% of GDP) and offers inconsistent health-care. Now, compare that with the vast majority of hunting & gathering bands whereas if Joe Schmoe was unable to hunt or gather, Joe would be well taken care of until he was able to get back on his feet. We know this process was even used with some Neanderthal bands because there were some fossilized whereas they had been severely injured, and yet we know they healed because of bone growth around the injury.

Capitalism puts a price tag on just about everything and anything, and it also tends to create issue of division, conflict, and often extreme poverty in otherwise areas whereas this shouldn't be the case because there are adequate resources.

OTOH, it has some benefit to it since some aspects of it, especially competition between bands, that seeming date well back into human history, so I would suggest that we can change some of the "bathwater" without throwing the "baby" out.

This is an advertisement for my upcoming thread "Capitalism Hits the Fan", coming to a local thread near you.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Capitalism does allow it...in the sense that capitalism is compatible with it, ie, it doesn't prevent voluntary communism. But it raises a question...if communism is so attractive, why do so few take the voluntary option? Instead, it's typically proposed as something universal, ie, for all without exception.

So few take it because so many have been severely misinformed. You yourself have fallen to many of the misconceptions, including the one that everyone has to be the same (which should raise some red flags if I would support something that mandates conformity).

This seems a political outlook based solely upon an anti-Republican & pro-abortion perspective.

Is it really anti-Republican and pro-abortion to be find "legitimate rape" to be such a very sexist concept? Think about this one. As for the Rs, they are the same party with a a dummy who believes vaginas can magically repel rape sperm.

Again, I suspect it was just a quirk of editing in your post. I only read what I saw....& it did seem very odd, hence my speechlessness.

No, it wasn't anything to do with editing. You combined two of my replies that were individual responses to your post, combined the two, and came up with an offensive conclusion. Honestly, I expected better out of someone who gets their own words twisted around.

I'll pay you 10 frubals to quit using that purple color in your font. It really messes up my responses....random colors....random insertions if quotie thingies....updates not fully taking.

I have been feeling like changing colors. Another color to go with my avatar maybe?
I also kind of like this one. But I don't know if I want to use it.

 

[Revoltingest]

So few take it because so many have been severely misinformed. You yourself have fallen to many of the misconceptions, including the one that everyone has to be the same....

No, we're talking about 2 different flavors of communism. The kind which is universal must have everyone be the same in the sense that they will not engage in capitalism. The kind which is voluntary means that only those who join the commune will share the communist philosophy.

Is it really anti-Republican and pro-abortion to be find "legitimate rape" to be such a very sexist concept? Think about this one. As for the Rs, they are the same party with a a dummy who believes vaginas can magically repel rape sperm.

It's a red herring to obsess over a single utterly goofy belief of a vanishingly small minority in a party I don't even belong to.

No, it wasn't anything to do with editing. You combined two of my replies that were individual responses to your post, combined the two, and came up with an offensive conclusion. Honestly, I expected better out of someone who gets their own words twisted around.

You were the one who posted those sentences sequentially. I read & quoted them exactly as you posted them. It seemed outlandish, which is why I attached a question mark to my inference, & then did not respond any further to it. If you "twist" your own words, this isn't my doing.

Here is your post again, exactly as I copied & pasted it with no alteration....
"I'm not denying it (I actually did acknowledge it), but I am calling the male Rs for trying to control a woman's reproductive choices. Even when you move to the bigger picture, you still have to call out those who are a part of the whole. And in this case, another R just made another absurd "legit rape" statement, so yes, it is a serious problem within the Republican party.
Ergo, capitalism must, upfront and deliberately, be inhibited."

Notice the last sentence, has "ergo", which means "therefore".
This meant to me that the preceding text lead to the conclusion following "ergo".
If you don't like what your post means, then you should write something different.

I have been feeling like changing colors. Another color to go with my avatar maybe?
I also kind of like this one. But I don't know if I want to use it.

How about basic black?

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Here is your post again, exactly as I copied & pasted it with no alteration....
"I'm not denying it (I actually did acknowledge it), but I am calling the male Rs for trying to control a woman's reproductive choices. Even when you move to the bigger picture, you still have to call out those who are a part of the whole. And in this case, another R just made another absurd "legit rape" statement, so yes, it is a serious problem within the Republican party.
Ergo, capitalism must, upfront and deliberately, be inhibited."

Dude? I even reposted it, as it originally is, and it is not a sequential post. You're either intentionally trying to be stupid or are somehow seeing my post in some other form than how it actually is. The way you even reposted it is not accurate. Seriously, what the hell is your problem? You even admit it seemed odd, but you couldn't scroll back up and see that there is the two are not a reply to the same thing?
I can't even believe I'm having to debate this!

How about basic black?

Nah. I think I'm going to use this for awhile. I could use black, but I have no desire to.