Stuff Republicans say.

[Tarheeler]

You fail to acknowledge that a hybrid system with capitalism can do what you want. There's no need to ditch it for.....for......uh.....what's your alternative? Where has your alternative worked at all? Cuba? N Korea? USSR? Pre-capitalistic PRC?

You can talk theory all you want...how people will be different....more caring about each other....less materialistic...more in tune with the natural world. But the reality of socialism is that when tried, the results are oppression & privation. The utopian theory seems an impractical fantasy.

The old "slavery" straw man, eh? It's been practiced not just by capitalists, but also by hunter gatherer societies, feudalism, & by socialist regimes (eg, Nazis, USSR). The cure to slavery isn't the simplistic & misguided banning of capitalism, but rather the prohibition of slavery itself.
Socialism is "philosophically based on more equality", but the actual results are even less rosy than evil capitalist countries like Canuckistan, Swedenstan, Australiastan or Americastan.

Here's the problem with discussing socialism & communism.....no matter what is argued against, the definition always changes. You oppose capitalism, & you praise socialism. Is there any real world example which you would admit eschews capitalism in favor of socialism?

This constant strawman never gets old.
No, really, it never does......

You present Marxism, and more specifically Leninism and Maoism, as the only examples of "real" socialism, and then decry anyone who points out your fallacy.

Yep, it's a real gem.

 

[Revoltingest]

This constant strawman never gets old.
No, really, it never does......
You present Marxism, and more specifically Leninism and Maoism, as the only examples of "real" socialism, and then decry anyone who points out your fallacy.
Yep, it's a real gem.

You only smell straw because you've missed the full conversation, across multiple threads. (People so misunderstand & misuse the concept of the straw man fallacy. A license should be required in order to use it.)
I've specifically avoided saying that any countries embody a singular definition of "socialism". I've even focused on the fact that there are different definitions for different people. Nonetheless, we see a few real world examples. which are variously acknowledged as such or not. So I've asked for alternatives...which haven't been forthcoming. Do you have any?

The issue is complicated by the fact that some vaunted 'socialist' countries are hybrids which employ a great deal of capitalism to fuel socialistic goals. Since the gist of many such recent discussions have been about eliminating capitalism, these hybrids aren't germane. Most people, including this groundskeeper, acknowledge that hybrids are here to stay, are a work in progress, & with work can improve. What say you of hybrid systems....good idea....bad idea....mere stepping stone to something else?

 

[Tarheeler]

I've had this very conversation with you multiple times and in multiple threads.

And it never changes.

 

[Revoltingest]

I've had this very conversation with you multiple times and in multiple threads.
And it never changes.

Actually, you don't really converse. You merely object to my posts. I'd like this to change.

 

[metis]

Sorta like talking to a wall. You explain things over and over again but some just keep coming back with the same old nonsense.

 

[Revoltingest]

Sorta like talking to a wall. You explain things over and over again but some just keep coming back with the same old nonsense.

Oh, how I know that feeling well. You can't even read my posts (being on <ignore> & all), but this doesn't stop you from attempting commentary in third person.

 

[Tarheeler]

Actually, you don't really converse. You merely object to my posts. I'd like this to change.

I'm sorry you feel that way, Rev. While I can't say that I've always had fun, I have thoroughly some of our conversations.

Oh well.

 

[Revoltingest]

I'm sorry you feel that way, Rev. While I can't say that I've always had fun, I have thoroughly some of our conversations.
Oh well.

It's not how I feel. I just observe that lately this is how it's been, ie, objection without participation. Your post was naught but ad hominem, & I find that you don't answer potentially clarifying questions. (I know we've disagreed about definitions before.) Perhaps this is the wrong thread to explore economics.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

I do wonder if some in the Republican party are slowly getting a clue that cutting taxes is not always a good idea and can result in a fiscal catastrophe. Witness Kansas. Of course, since cutting taxes is an article of faith amongst conservatives, the example of California which is booming and has high taxes versus Kansas will be ignored or explained away.

Sam Brownback reverses course, proposes new taxes

I've noticed the same with Arizona and Wisconsin.

 

[metis]

I've noticed the same with Arizona and Wisconsin.

And here in Michigan, the Republican controlled congress and Republican governor have dug themselves into a nice hole because now we're running a deficit that's predicted to get even worse next year.

 

[Revoltingest]

And here in Michigan, the Republican controlled congress and Republican governor have dug themselves into a nice hole because now we're running a deficit that's predicted to get even worse next year.

Michigan's constitution prohibits running a deficit, so that cannot be.
In related news, reduced federal aid & increased spending on education will require some cuts in order to balance the budget. (I'd like to see an increase in fuel tax, but legislators disagree.)

 

[Dirty Penguin]

This constant strawman never gets old.
No, really, it never does......

You present Marxism, and more specifically Leninism and Maoism, as the only examples of "real" socialism, and then decry anyone who points out your fallacy.

Yep, it's a real gem.

......

 

[sun rise]

Au contraire, you have it entirely wrong. "Libertarian" (small "l") can mean pretty much anything (especially on RF....see it's definition).....there are socialists, communists & anarchist libertarians too. But we Libertarians (the capital "L" types who belong to the Americastanian & Canuckistanian political parties) are minarchist, ie, we favor a smaller central government limited by a constitution. "Right wing" just doesn't apply to any, although they might share our preference for capitalism & free markets.

Capitalism has always had "cracks", & always will. It's a stochastic system with dynamic emergent properties. This is a consequence of having individual liberty (both social & economic) without central planning. If you want predictability, highly controlled behavior, then capitalism isn't for you. But all systems have cracks....hunter gatherer is archaic, communism is an impossibility, & socialism results in oppression. Even you have a crack.....it's true....I have pix!

You present a nuanced view of what you believe but don't credit others with the same sense of nuance. Your overgeneralization of my beliefs called forth the overgeneralization of yours.

The cracks in capitalism have always been there as a dynamic system changes. But now the old capitalism is dying. It's dying hard and slowly, to be sure, but over time the old system will die.

 

[Revoltingest]

......

 

[sun rise]

Meanwhile, back to the OP, Republican presidential candidates are paying homage, bowing and scraping, to the true rulers:

Koch Seminar Is Early Proving Ground for G.O.P. Hopefuls

Perhaps no organization commands more deference in Republican politics nowadays than the sprawling operation established by the Koch brothers. And this week, the intense competition among Republicans for their embrace and attention will break out into the open. An invitation-only group of 2016 hopefuls will travel to a resort near Palm Springs, Calif., for the Koch brothers’ annual winter seminar, kicking off the so-called Koch primary.

 

[Revoltingest]

You present a nuanced view of what you believe but don't credit others with the same sense of nuance. Your overgeneralization of my beliefs called forth the overgeneralization of yours.

Credit for nuanced views is seldom given here by anyone. Notice how so many accuse me of merely touting dishonest straw men? Criticism is the norm, especially by those who haven't read the subject posts.

One of the problems is that those who object so vehemently to other uses of the term "socialism", will either fail to present their own, or will give no real world example of their preference. I don't give credit to attacks on caricatures of capitalism, & calls to replace it with something undefined or failed. But there are many socialists with whom I find nuance & thoughtful opinion....some of them here at RF, eg, Darkness. I judge on a post by post basis.

We all see our beliefs over-generalized at times....tis best to make prompt corrections. I so often hear that I oppose all regulation of business, etc, etc. So if I misunderstand, I want to be corrected with an elaboration.

The cracks in capitalism have always been there as a dynamic system changes. But now the old capitalism is dying. It's dying hard and slowly, to be sure, but over time the old system will die.

Predictions are difficult, especially about the future. I don't know to what you refer by "the old capitalism", but capitalism itself (ie, market economy with free economic exchange) appears inevitable. Those countries who try to eliminate it have suffered, but those with hybrid economies (a mix of capitalism & socialist goals) are faring well. I favor a better capitalism than we have in Americastan, eg, more environmental protection, more energy independence, less corruption (crony capitalism), etc, etc.

 

[sun rise]

...

Predictions are difficult, especially about the future. I don't know to what you refer by "the old capitalism", but capitalism itself (ie, market economy with free economic exchange) appears inevitable. Those countries who try to eliminate it have suffered, but those with hybrid economies (a mix of capitalism & socialist goals) are faring well. I favor a better capitalism than we have in Americastan, eg, more environmental protection, more energy independence, less corruption (crony capitalism), etc, etc.

It's funny, but stated that way, our views are reasonably close to each other - close enough for a compromise between then.

What I mean by "old" capitalism is more about social evolution. In the past and continuing today is a "greed is good" mindset where only short term winning in a field of unbridled economic darwinism counted and everything else was disparaged. We see it today in China where poison in food and ecological/health disasters are not really considered important compared to money.

By "new" I mean the change from money being the only marker of success to one we're already starting to see as I mentioned earlier: social entrepreneurs and "B corporations". They need to make a profit to survive but their motivation is more than just money - it's to make a positive mark in the world.

 

[Revoltingest]

It's funny, but stated that way, our views are reasonably close to each other - close enough for a compromise between then.

This might be one of those "great minds think alike" moments, eh?

What I mean by "old" capitalism is more about social evolution. In the past and continuing today is a "greed is good" mindset where only short term winning in a field of unbridled economic darwinism counted and everything else was disparaged. We see it today in China where poison in food and ecological/health disasters are not really considered important compared to money.
By "new" I mean the change from money being the only marker of success to one we're already starting to see as I mentioned earlier: social entrepreneurs and "B corporations". They need to make a profit to survive but their motivation is more than just money - it's to make a positive mark in the world.

I don't think the money mentality will change, but it can be harnessed for better results than we're getting now.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

Oh, this is going g to be interesting.....!

Kansas Senators Introduce 'Permit-Less' Concealed Carry Bill

 

[esmith]

Oh, this is going g to be interesting.....!

Kansas Senators Introduce 'Permit-Less' Concealed Carry Bill

So what is your problem with this?